Dual-compartment behavioral apparatus for studying active and passive avoidance learning in rodents, featuring independent shock grids, audio, and lighting controls with configurable visual contexts.
Director of Science · ConductScience
Ask Louise about Active/Passive Avoidance Shuttle Box fit, setup, configuration, or quote prep.
Already working with us? Sign in to connect this with My Scientist.
Featured in a Mass General Brigham press release.
For fear acquisition, mice were placed in a 22 × 22 cm mouse shuttle box (Maze Engineers) with the escape door closed and with black walls scented with 0.1% banana (Shank’s Extracts, S90159) in 70% ethanol.
Maze Engineers, the maker named in the paper, is part of ConductScience.
Last counted
The Active/Passive Avoidance Shuttle Box is a dual-compartment behavioral apparatus designed for studying associative learning, memory formation, and avoidance behaviors in rodents. The system features two independently controlled chambers with removable acrylic plating that allows researchers to configure visual contexts for different experimental paradigms. Each compartment is equipped with independent shock grids, audio speakers, and lighting systems, enabling precise control over aversive and conditioned stimuli.
This apparatus supports both active avoidance paradigms (where animals learn to move between compartments to avoid aversive stimuli) and passive avoidance protocols (where animals learn to remain in a specific location). The modular design accommodates both mouse and rat studies, with adjustable chamber dimensions and contextual plating configurations. Independent control systems for each compartment allow for sophisticated experimental designs including discrimination learning, extinction protocols, and memory consolidation studies.
The shuttle box operates on principles of classical and operant conditioning, where animals learn to associate environmental cues with aversive stimuli and modify their behavior accordingly. In active avoidance protocols, animals learn to shuttle between compartments in response to conditioned stimuli (typically auditory or visual cues) to avoid or escape mild electric shocks delivered through the grid floor. The temporal relationship between conditioned stimulus presentation and shock delivery determines the learning paradigm.
Passive avoidance protocols utilize the natural exploratory behavior of rodents, where animals initially explore both compartments but learn to avoid the compartment previously associated with aversive stimuli. The configurable acrylic plating creates distinct visual contexts that serve as discriminative cues, with black/black configurations typically used for active avoidance and white/black configurations for passive avoidance paradigms.
Independent control systems for each compartment enable sophisticated experimental designs including discrimination learning, where animals must distinguish between safe and aversive contexts, and reversal learning protocols that assess behavioral flexibility and memory updating mechanisms.
These IDs come from NCBI Taxonomy. Use them in data records and methods sections.
NCBITaxon:10090 NCBITaxon:10116 | Feature | This Product | Typical Alternative | Advantage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Audio Frequency Range | 100-40,000Hz with dual independent channels | Basic models often limited to audible frequencies with single channel output | Enables ultrasonic conditioning protocols specific to rodent hearing ranges while supporting complex auditory discrimination tasks. |
| Shock Current Control | 0.1-4.0mA in 0.1mA increments with DC delivery | Fewer intensity steps with AC current systems common in entry-level models | Provides precise stimulus titration for individual animal sensitivity and eliminates AC artifacts in physiological recordings. |
| Visual Context Configuration | Removable acrylic plating with black/black, white/black, and clear options | Fixed chamber configurations requiring separate apparatus for different protocols | Enables rapid protocol switching between active and passive avoidance paradigms using the same apparatus. |
| Lighting System | Independent visible and IR dual bulb controls for each compartment | Single lighting mode with limited compartment-specific control | Supports simultaneous behavioral observation under IR while delivering visible light as conditioned stimuli. |
| Software Integration | Conductor Science Software with Neuralynx and Ethovision integration | Basic data logging software with limited analysis capabilities | Eliminates separate I/O boxes while providing comprehensive data analysis and third-party system integration. |
| Species Adaptability | Configurable dimensions for both mouse and rat studies | Species-specific models requiring separate apparatus for different rodent types | Provides cost-effective solution for multi-species research programs with optimized scaling for each species. |
This system offers comprehensive stimulus control capabilities with precise parameter adjustment, configurable visual contexts, and software integration that supports complex behavioral paradigms. The dual-species compatibility and modular design provide experimental flexibility beyond fixed-configuration alternatives.
| Model | SKU | Listed price | Status | Shipping box |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mouse | ME-6001 | $6,900.00 | Available | 43.2 × 38.0 × 27.9 cm |
| Rat | ME-6002 | $7,900.00 | Available | 43.2 × 38.0 × 27.9 cm |
Verify shock grid conductivity before each experimental session by measuring current delivery at multiple intensity settings with a digital multimeter.
Why: Ensures consistent aversive stimulus delivery and prevents learning deficits due to inadequate shock intensities.
Clean shock grids with alcohol-based disinfectants and allow complete drying before reassembly to prevent current leakage.
Why: Maintains electrical safety and prevents cross-contamination between animal subjects.
Randomize chamber assignment across subjects and counterbalance which compartment serves as the aversive zone to control for spatial biases.
Why: Eliminates apparatus-related confounds that could influence learning performance independent of experimental manipulations.
If animals show reluctance to cross between compartments, reduce shock intensity and verify that grid spacing provides adequate foot contact.
Why: Ensures aversive stimuli are perceived consistently while preventing tissue damage or excessive stress responses.
Record baseline activity patterns in both compartments before conditioning to establish individual exploration preferences.
Why: Provides reference data for normalizing learning scores and identifying animals with pre-existing spatial biases.
Use infrared lighting during behavioral sessions to minimize stress responses while maintaining adequate observational conditions.
Why: Reduces anxiety-inducing visual stimuli that could confound learning measurements while preserving data collection quality.
Allow 5-10 minutes of habituation in the apparatus before beginning conditioning trials to reduce novelty-induced behaviors.
Why: Establishes consistent baseline activity levels and improves signal-to-noise ratio in learning measurements.
Monitor trial-by-trial latencies to identify plateau phases and determine when learning criteria have been achieved.
Why: Enables objective determination of acquisition endpoints and prevents overtraining that could obscure treatment effects.
ConductScience provides a standard one-year manufacturer warranty covering defects in materials and workmanship, with technical support for setup and protocol optimization.
Background reading relevant to this product:
What shock intensities are appropriate for mouse versus rat studies?
The system provides 0.1-4.0mA range in 0.1mA increments. Mice typically require 0.2-0.8mA while rats generally use 0.5-2.0mA, depending on strain sensitivity and experimental requirements. Pilot studies should establish minimum effective intensities for each cohort.
Can the apparatus support simultaneous physiological recordings?
Yes, the DC current shock delivery system minimizes electrical artifacts that could interfere with concurrent electrophysiological recordings. The infrared lighting option enables behavioral monitoring without visible light artifacts.
How do I configure chambers for discrimination learning protocols?
Use the white/black acrylic plating configuration to create distinct visual contexts. Independent control of audio, lighting, and shock systems in each compartment enables complex discrimination paradigms with compartment-specific stimulus associations.
What data outputs are available for learning curve analysis?
Integration with Conductor Science Software provides trial-by-trial latency measurements, crossing frequencies, and time spent in each compartment. Custom analysis protocols can track acquisition curves and extinction patterns.
How should I clean the apparatus between subjects?
Remove shock grids for thorough cleaning with appropriate disinfectants. Acrylic plating can be removed and sanitized separately. Allow complete drying before reassembly to prevent electrical complications.
What environmental controls are necessary for consistent results?
A sound attenuation chamber (sold separately) is recommended to control ambient noise. Maintain consistent temperature and lighting conditions, as these factors can influence baseline activity levels and learning rates.
Can I modify stimulus timing parameters for different learning protocols?
Yes, the system supports programmable stimulus timing sequences through the software interface. Configure conditioned stimulus-unconditioned stimulus intervals from milliseconds to minutes depending on experimental design.
How does this compare to single-compartment passive avoidance systems?
The dual-compartment design enables both active and passive avoidance protocols within the same apparatus. This provides greater experimental flexibility and allows for more complex behavioral paradigms than single-compartment systems.
Each paper below used this product. Under each title is the paper’s own sentence naming the equipment it used.
During the drug testing day, mice were weighed and administered IP with either vehicle, or treatment and then immediately placed in the active avoidance shuttle box while an automated tracking system (Maze Engineers, Cambridge, MA) monitored responses over a 50-trial session.
During the training session, each mouse was placed in the well-lit section of a PA apparatus (Maze Engineers, Skokie, IL) with the connecting door closed.
For fear acquisition, mice were placed in a 22 × 22 cm mouse shuttle box (Maze Engineers) with the escape door closed and with black walls scented with 0.1% banana (Shank’s Extracts, S90159) in 70% ethanol.
Aversion training was performed as described in [63] using a system from MazeEngineers (Conduct Science).
Aversion training was performed as described in [51] using a system from MazeEngineers (Conduct Science).
The apparatus (Maze Engineers, Shokie, IL) consisted of two chambers (20 × 20 × 20 cm) that were connected via an automated sliding door (7 × 5 cm).
Active/Passive Avoidance Shuttle Boxes from MazeEngineers (Boston, MA) were used for the experiment.
The floor of both chambers contains metal rungs on the floor connected to a shock delivery apparatus (Maze Engineers).
Behavioral recordings were taken from a square open field box, the mouse home cage, an isoflurane induction chamber, or from one side of an Active/Passive Avoidance Shuttle Box (MazeEngineers).
ConductVision is our video-tracking software. Record your sessions on video, and it reports the measures listed below.
The tests above need the Advanced Rodent Module, an add-on to the ConductVision license.
A 5-year license is $3,990 in total.
The Advanced Rodent Module runs on this license. On its own, the license scores standard tests such as the open field, the elevated plus maze, the Y-maze and the Morris water maze. Results export as CSV files.
A 5-year module license is $3,990 in total, the same as the 5-year base license.
Send it over and we'll email you a personalized answer, with no call or scheduling.
Prefer to talk it through?
Enhance your setup with compatible accessories
Creator Insights
Richard L. Solomon (1918–1995) earned his PhD from Brown University and rose to full professor at Harvard University before moving to the University of Pennsylvania; Lyman C. Wynne was a colleague in his Harvard laboratory. Their 1953 Psychological Monographs paper introduced controlled shuttle-box avoidance conditioning, showing that pairing a warning cue with shock produces avoidance responses strikingly resistant to extinction. This work defined the acquisition and extinction properties underlying both two-way active avoidance — in which the animal crosses to the opposite compartment to avoid shock — and passive-avoidance variants. Solomon went on to develop two-process avoidance theory and opponent-process motivational theory, remaining among the most influential learning scientists of the 20th century.
To view Richard L. Solomon’s publications, visit PubMed.
Did you work with Richard L. Solomon? to suggest corrections or share material for these Creator Insights.
ConductScience celebrates method creators: researchers who, through rigorous and often ingenious experiments, develop the tools that reveal how the brain and body work. These are real scientific discoveries that become everyday instruments for the labs that follow.
Use this apparatus with
Two-compartment habituation, conditioned-stimulus and foot-shock timing, trial spacing, and definitions for avoidance, escape, and escape-failure responses.
ConductMaze Passive Avoidance Protocol ->Summarize avoidance responses, escape responses, escape failures, intertrial crossings, and response latency with quality-control flags.
Active/Passive Avoidance Calculator ->§ 1
The Active/Passive Avoidance Shuttle Box measures avoidance learning by recording how reliably an animal crosses between two compartments in response to a conditioned stimulus that signals an impending foot-shock. Bolles framed shuttle-box avoidance in terms of species-specific defense reactions, explaining why some responses are learned far more readily than others. 1
In two-way active avoidance a tone or light precedes the foot-shock; crossing during the cue is an avoidance response, crossing during the shock is an escape response, and failing to cross is an escape failure. Solomon and Wynne described the persistence and partial irreversibility of these traumatic-avoidance responses in early shuttle-box work. 1
Shock intensity, baseline locomotor activity, conditioned-stimulus salience, warm-up effects across a session, and strain reactivity all change the avoidance rate independent of true learning. A defensible protocol calibrates shock intensity, balances cue salience, separates avoidance from escape and escape-failure responses, and reports intertrial crossings as an activity check. 1
§ 2
Two-way active-avoidance acquisition with conditioned-stimulus and foot-shock timing and separate scoring of avoidance, escape, and escape-failure responses.
Critical methodological constraints
Core shuttle-box avoidance endpoints for active-avoidance learning and quality control.
Avoidance Responses
Active avoidance learning
Escape Responses
Reactive escape
Escape Failures
Quality control
Intertrial Crossings
Activity confound
Response Latency
Learning speed
+ Additional metrics: trials to criterion, avoidance-curve slope, body weight, strain, shock intensity, cue modality, and per-session apparatus notes.
A compact fraction of cued responses that were anticipatory avoidances rather than reactive escapes.
Estimate the N per group needed to detect a literature-anchored avoidance-learning effect at the endpoint you plan to report. Override the defaults with your own pilot numbers.
§ 3
Representative output from a 50-trial two-way active-avoidance session with a 5 s cue and a 2 s cue-to-shock interval.
§ 4
Limitations of the paradigm, methodological caveats, and current directions.
Variables that can shift Active/Passive Avoidance Shuttle Box results apart from the effect under study.
Avoidance and escape rates scale with shock intensity. Without a calibrated and reported intensity, group differences can reflect the stimulus rather than learning.
General hyperactivity raises crossing counts independent of learning. Report intertrial crossings to separate activity from cued avoidance.
A weak or ambiguous conditioned stimulus slows acquisition.
Avoidance often rises within a session as the animal warms up. Analyze the acquisition curve rather than a single early block.
Strains differ in reactivity and freezing tendency, which competes with active crossing. Hold strain constant and compare across strains cautiously.
The shuttle box is strongest when shock intensity, cue salience, trial structure, and response definitions are fixed before testing. A single avoidance rate is a screening signal; confirm avoidance-learning effects by separating escape and escape-failure responses and by reporting the acquisition curve and intertrial crossings in the same cohort. 1
Two-way active avoidance creates a conflict because the animal must return to a previously shocked compartment. A one-way active or a passive step-through design removes that conflict and can be cleaner when freezing competes with crossing.
Avoidance crossings during the cue index anticipatory learning, while escape crossings during the shock are reactive. Folding them into one count hides whether a group difference is in learning or in reactivity.
Yes. General hyperactivity raises crossing counts independent of learning, so intertrial crossings act as an activity check that keeps an active animal from being misread as a fast learner.
Quarterly editorial review of emerging Active/Passive Avoidance Shuttle Box methodology. Q2 2026
Calibrating and reporting shock intensity and conditioned-stimulus salience across rigs improves comparability of avoidance rates between labs and apparatus models.
Gate photobeams and floor-grid sensing capture avoidance, escape, and escape-failure responses and latencies consistently while reducing observer burden.
Reporting the avoidance acquisition curve and trials-to-criterion rather than a single block is increasingly expected because within-session warm-up shifts a single-block rate.
Shuttle-box avoidance is paired with step-down avoidance and contextual fear conditioning to separate active avoidance from inhibitory avoidance and reactive responding in the same cohort.
§ 5
6 selected methods and validation studies of the Active/Passive Avoidance Shuttle Box, from any lab.
