The Effect Of Discriminability On The Partial Reinforcement Effect In Human Gsr Conditioning

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Request accessible transcript

Transcript (if available)

Content This dissertation has been
microfilmed exactly as received
69-610
FIEBIGER, Josephine Beatrice, 1918-
THE EFFECT OF DISCREMINABILITY ON THE PARTIAL
REINFORCEMENT EFFECT IN HUMAN GSR CONDITION
ING.
University of Southern California, Ph.D., 1968
Psychology, experimental
University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan
THE EFFECT OF DISCRIMINABILITY
O N THE PARTIAL REINFORCEM ENT EFFECT
IN H U M A N GSR CONDITIONING
fey
Josephine Beatrice Fiebiger
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE G RA D U A TE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Rea„uirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
(Psychology)
June 1968
UNIVERSITY O F SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY PARK
LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 9 0 0 0 7
This dissertation, written by
J o s e p h in e B e a t r i c e F i e b i g e r
under the direction of h?.L... Dissertation Com
mittee, and approved by all its members, has
been presented to and accepted by the Graduate
School, in partial fulfillment of requirements
for the degree of
D O C T O R OF P H I L O S O P H Y
Dean
Date.........
DISSERTATION COMMITTEE
firman
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
T h is d i s s e r t a t i o n r e p r e s e n t s th e work o f many p e o p le —
a l l th e f i n e p r o f e s s o r s who s h a re d t h e i r knowledge w ith
me and who i n s p i r e d me t o become a p r o f e s s o r , i n t u r n .
I t i s im p o s s ib le t o m en tio n each by name, b u t I do want
to th a n k s p e c i f i c a l l y th e members o f my o r i g i n a l
com m ittee: D rs . C l i f f , Holmes, L o n g s t r e t h , and S l u c k i.
I am p a r t i c u l a r l y i n d e b te d t o Dr. W illia m G rin g s , my
d i s s e r t a t i o n c h a irm a n , who w ith wisdom and p a t i e n c e
g u id ed me th ro u g h o u t much o f my academ ic c a r e e r .
I a l s o want t o e x p re s s my th a n k s t o t h e members o f th e
P sycho logy S e r v i c e , headed by Dr. George S e a c a t, a t th e
Long Beach V e t e r a n s ’ A d m i n is tr a tio n H o s p i t a l . They j
I
i
g e n e r o u s ly f u r n i s h e d me w ith th e f a c i l i t i e s t o con d u ct i
j
my e x p e rim e n t and a t a l l tim e s made me f e e l welcome. A |
s p e c i a l n o te o f g r a t i t u d e i s due Dr. Reed B o sw e ll, my
s p o n s o r t h e r e , who was o u t s t a n d i n g i n h i s h e l p f u l n e s s and
c o n s i s t e n t en co u rag e m en t. !
TABLE OP CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.............................. i i
LIST OP TABLES.....................* ......................... . . . . . v
LIST OP FIGURES. . ................................... v i i
C h a p te r
I . INTRODUCTION . ................................................ 1
I I . BACKGROUND OP THE PROBLEM............................... 3
The PRE i n E y e l id 'C o n d itio n in g R e se arch
The PRE i n GSR C o n d itio n in g R e se a rc h
Com parison o f t h e GSR and E y e l id Response
I I I . SUMMARY OP THE PROBLEM................................. 24
IV. METHOD . . . . . ................................................ 26
S u b je c ts
D esign
A pp aratu s
P ro ced u re
V. RESULTS.......................................................................... 32
GSR M agnitude
E q u a l i t y o f Groups
C o n d itio n in g o f t h e GSR
The PRE i n th e R e g u la r Group
The PRE i n th e E q u a liz e d Group
Q u e s tio n n a ir e
VI. DISCUSSION................................................................ 53
P r e d i c t i o n 1
P r e d i c t i o n 2
P r e d i c t i o n 3
iii
C h ap ter
V I I . SUMMARY . . . . .. .
LIST OF REFERENCES ..........................
APPENDICES ...............................................
Appendix A— I n s t r u c t i o n s
Appendix B— Q u e s tio n n a ir e
Appendix C— T a b le s
LIST OP TABLES
TABLE Page
1. Summary o f GSR Mean M agnitudes fo r
Groups on E x t i n c t i o n T r i a l s 1 -1 6 . . .......................... 85
2. Summary o f V a ria n c e s f o r Groups on
E x t i n c t i o n T r i a l s 1 -1 6 . . . . . .................................... 86
3. A n a ly s is o f V a ria n c e o f Response to
CS on th e L a s t A d a p ta tio n T r i a l .................................... 87
4. A n a ly sis o f V a ria n c e o f CR’ s on the
F i r s t E x t i n c t i o n T r i a l .................................................... 88
5 S A n a ly s is o f V a ria n c e o f CR’s o f 4
E x p e rim e n ta l Groups on 1 s t E x t i n c t i o n T r i a l
(R -5 0, R-100, E -5 0, E -1 0 0 ). ............................................... 89
6 . Summary o f t_ t e s t s Comparing E x p e ri
m e n ta l v s . C o n tro l Groups on 1 s t E x t i n c t i o n T r i a l 90
7 . A n a ly s is o f V a ria n c e o f CR’s o f R-50 and
R-100 Ss on E x t i n c t i o n T r i a l s 2 - 1 6 ............................... 91
8 . A n a ly s is o f V a ria n c e o f CR’s o f R-50
and R-100 Ss on E x t i n c t i o n T r i a l s 2 - 6 ................... 92
9 . A n a ly s is o f V a ria n c e o f CR’s o f R-50
and R-100 Ss on E x t i n c t i o n T r i a l s 7-11 . . . . 93
10. A n a ly s is o f V a ria n c e o f CR’ s o f R-50
and R-100 S_s on E x t i n c t i o n T r i a l s 12-16 . . . . 9 4 _
11. Summary o f t_ t e s t s ( d f = 22) Comparing
R-50 and R-100 Ss on E x t i n c t i o n T r i a l s 2-16 . . 95
12 . A n a ly s is o f V a ria n c e o f CR’ s o f E-50
and E-100 Ss on E x t i n c t i o n T r i a l s 2-16 . . . . 96
13* A n a ly s is o f V a ria n c e o f CR’ s o f E-50
and E-100 Ss on E x t i n c t i o n T r i a l s 2 - 6 ................... 97
14 . A n a ly s is o f V a ria n c e o f CR's o f E-50 and
E-100 S_s on E x t i n c t i o n T r i a l s 7 - H .......................... 98
v
T able Page
15. A n a ly s is o f V a ria n c e o f CR’ s o f E-50
and E-100 Ss on E x t i n c t i o n T r i a l s 12-16 .. .. . . 99
16. A n a ly s is of V a ria n c e o f CR’ s o f R -100,
E -50, and E-100 Ss on E x t i n c t i o n T r i a l s 2-16 . , . 100
17. Summary o f S_s R esponses on Q u e s tio n -
a i r e .............................. 101
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1. Mean GSR m agnitude o f R-50 and R-100 Ss
d u rin g e x t i n c t i o n ......................................................... 36
2. Mean GSR m agnitude o f R-50 and R-100 Ss
d u rin g e x t i n c t i o n i n s u c c e s s iv e b lo c k s
o f f i v e t r i a l s . 38
3. Mean GSR m agnitude o f E-50 and E-100 Ss
d u rin g e x t i n c t i o n ........................ 43
4. Mean GSR m agnitude o f E-50 and E-100 Ss
d u rin g e x t i n c t i o n i n s u c c e s s iv e b lo c k s
o f f i v e t r i a l s ............................................. 46
5. Mean GSR m agnitude o f R-50, R-100, E -5 0 ,
and E-100 Ss d u rin g e x t i n c t i o n ............................ 48
6. Mean GSR m agnitude o f R-50, R-100, E -50 ,
E-100 Ss d u rin g e x t i n c t i o n in s u c c e s s iv e
b lo c k s o f f i v e t r i a l s .............................................. 49
v i l
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Spence ( 1 9 6 6 ) r e c e n t l y advanced a t h e o r y o f e x t i n c
t i o n f o r c l a s s i c a l a v e r s i v e c o n d i t i o n i n g . His t h e o r y ,
c a l l e d t h e D i s c r i m i n a t i o n H y p o th e s is , i s an a tte m p t t o
e x p l a i n two d i s c r e p a n c i e s b etw een a n im a l and human s u b j e c t s
i n th e c l a s s i c a l a v e r s i v e s e t u p : (a) Anim als c o n d i t i o n
and e x t i n g u i s h a t t h e same r a t e ; humans e x t i n g u i s h
much f a s t e r t h a n t h e y c o n d i t i o n , (b) Animals do n o t show
th e p a r t i a l r e i n f o r c e m e n t e f f e c t (PRE); humans do.
On th e b a s i s o f th e two d i s c r e p a n c i e s , Spence
h y p o th e s iz e d t h a t human s u b j e c t s d i s c r i m i n a t e t h e change
from c o n d i t i o n i n g t o e x t i n c t i o n t r i a l s and a d o p t an
i n h i b i t o r y s e t n o t t o re s p o n d . E x t i n c t i o n i s e x tre m e ly
r a p i d s i n c e th e s e t i n t e r f e r e s w ith a p p e a ra n c e o f th e
c o n d it i o n e d r e s p o n s e . P a r t i a l r e in f o r c e m e n t i n a c q u i s i t i o n
t r i a l s p r e c l u d e s o r d e la y s th e d i s c r i m i n a t i o n so t h a t th e
decrem ent i n th e c o n d it i o n e d re s p o n s e (CR) i s more g r a d u a l
and r e f l e c t s th e c u m u la tiv e develop m en t o f i n h i b i t i o n from
n o n r e i n f o r c e m e n t, n o t th e p r e s e n c e o f an i n h i b i t o r y s e t .
|
H ig h e r o r d e r i n h i b i t o r y s e t s a r e n o t p r e s e n t i n organism s
la c k in g c o g n i t i v e p r o c e s s e s ( i . e . , a n i m a l s ) ; hence t h e
2
d i s c r e p a n c i e s betw een d a t a from a n im a l and human s u b j e c t s
(Ss),.
S in c e S p e n c e ’s th e o r y (1966) comes e x c l u s i v e l y
from e y e l i d c o n d i t i o n i n g e x p e rim e n ts , how a p p l i c a b l e i s
i t to o th e r r e s p o n s e s c l a s s i c a l l y c o n d it i o n e d w i t h an
a v e r s i v e u n c o n d itio n e d s tim u lu s (UCS)? I f h i s th e o r y
h o ld s only f o r human e y e l i d c o n d i t i o n i n g , th e n i t i s
a m in a tu re t h e o r y in d e e d . However, i f c e r t a i n i m p l i c a t
io n s from t h e th e o r y w ere t e s t e d by u s in g a d i f f e r e n t
r e s p o n s e sy ste m and com parable r e s u l t s were o b t a i n e d , th e
D i s c r i m i n a t i o n H y p o th e sis would be s u p p o rte d f u r t h e r .
The p u rp o se o f th e p r e s e n t r e s e a r c h was t o t e s t
th e g e n e r a l i t y o f S p e n c e ’ s e x t i n c t i o n th e o r y by c l a s s i c
a l l y c o n d i t i o n i n g th e g a lv a n ic s k i n re s p o n s e (GSR)
un der two r e i n f o r c e m e n t s c h e d u l e s , c o n tin u o u s (CRF) and
p a r t i a l .(PRF). The c o n d it i o n e d r e s p o n s e s o b ta in e d w ere
th e n e x ti n g u i s h e d u n d er d i f f e r e n t p r o c e d u r e s . The
f o c a l p o in t o f t h e s tu d y was th e PRE and t h e e x t e n t t o
w hich i t v a r i e d a s a consequ ence o f ’’d i s c r i m i n a b i l i t y " ,
d e f i n e d by t h e e x p e r im e n ta l m a n ip u la tio n s d u r in g th e
e x t i n c t i o n p r o c e s s .
CHAPTER I I
BACKGROUND OP THE PROBLEM
The PRE i n E y e l id C o n d itio n in g R e se a rc h
S p e n c e 's t h e o r y e v o lv e d from a l a r g e body o f
e m p i r i c a l d a t a g a th e r e d i n e y e l i d c o n d i t i o n i n g e x p e r i
m e n ts. An e x a m in a tio n o f th e r e l e v a n t r e s e a r c h shows
t h a t two b a s i c p re m is e s o f th e th e o r y a r e s t r o n g l y
s u p p o rte d : (a ) t h a t e x t i n c t i o n o f th e e y e l i d re s p o n s e
i s r a p i d i n human S s; and (b) t h a t e x t i n c t i o n i s l e s s
r a p i d f o r human Ss c o n d i t i o n e d u n d e r a PRP s c h e d u l e .
The c l a s s i c s tu d y o f th e PRE i n e y e l i d c o n d i t i o n
in g was c o n d u c te d by Humphreys (1 9 3 9 ). He r a n t h r e e
g ro u p s o f S s. Group I was g iv e n 100$ r e in f o r c e m e n t f o r
96 t r i a l s ; Group I I was g iv e n 50$ r e i n f o r c e m e n t (48
random ly r e i n f o r c e d t r i a l s and 48 n o n r e i n f o r c e d t r i a l s ) ;
and Group I I I was g iv e n 100$ r e in f o r c e m e n t f o r 48 t r i a l s
w ith r e s t p e r i o d s i n t e r s p e r s e d a t th e same i n t e r v a l s as
Group I I ' s n o n r e i n f o r c e d t r i a l s . F o llo w in g t h e c o n d i t i o n
in g a l l t h r e e gro u p s had 24 e x t i n c t i o n t r i a l s . Humphreys,
u n l i k e some l a t e r e x p e r i m e n t e r s , found no d i f f e r e n c e i n
a c q u i s i t i o n among t h e t h r e e g ro u p s ; b u t in e x t i n c t i o n
Group I I , th e PRP g ro u p , re s p o n d e d a t a s i g n i f i c a n t l y
h i g h e r l e v e l th a n Groups I o r I I I , th e GRP g r o u p s . Groups
I and I I I r e q u i r e d l e s s t h a n 12 t r i a l s t o r e a c h a random
3
l e v e l o f r e s p o n d in g , d e f i n e d by Humphreys a t a b o u t 20$;
t h a t i s , by t r i a l 12 o n ly one o u t o f f i v e Ss were re s p o n d
in g t o t h e . CS.
I t w i l l be n o te d t h a t Group I I and Group I I I i n
H um phreys's e x p e rim e n t (1939) were m atched on h a b i t
s t r e n g t h (H) and d r i v e (D) by h i s p r o c e d u r e . The te r m s ,
h a b i t s t r e n g t h and d r i v e , a re u se d th ro u g h o u t t h e p r e s e n t
p a p er as Spence d e f i n e d them i n th e c l a s s i c a l a v e r s i v e
c o n d i t i o n i n g s i t u a t i o n . H a b i t, an a s s o c i a t i v e c o n c e p t,
i s b a s e d p r i m a r i l y on th e number o f c o n d i t i o n i n g t r i a l s ^ th e
p a i r e d p r e s e n t a t i o n s o f th e CS and UCS w i t h i n c e r t a i n
l i m i t i n g c o n d i t i o n s n o t f u l l y d e f i n e d . D riv e , a m o ti v a t
i o n a l c o n c e p t, i s b a se d on th e i n t e n s i t y o f th e UCS and
t h e sum o f i t s p r e s e n t a t i o n s ( G r in g s , 1963; S pence, i 960) .
A lthough Humphreys (1939) found no d i f f e r e n c e j
!
i n a c q u i s i t i o n betw een t h e PRF and.CRF g ro u p s, s u b s e q u e n t j
. . . j
r e s e a r c h (G ra n t & Hake, 1951; G rant & S c h ip p e r , 1952; ■
G r a n t, S c h ip p e r , & R o ss, 1952) showed t h a t 100$ r e i n f o r c e - |
ment r e s u l t s i n h i g h e r r e s p o n d in g even when d r i v e and number
j ;
jof r e i n f o r c e d t r i a l s a r e e q u a te d (R e y n o ld s, 1958) . However,
j
|in a l l t h e c i t e d s t u d i e s r e s i s t a n c e to e x t i n c t i o n was s i g n - j
i !
j i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r f o r th e PRF g r o u p s . I n a d d i t i o n , th e
!CRF g ro u p s r e q u i r e d c o m p a r a tiv e ly few t r i a l s t o re a c h
| " '
jthe 20$ l e v e l o f r e s p o n d in g .
! The t h i r d b a s i c p re m ise o f S p e n c e 's th e o r y ( 1966)
i
j i s : when d i s c r i m i n a b i l i t y betw een a c q u i s i t i o n and e x t i n c t i o n
5
t r i a l s i s m in im iz ed , th e e x t i n c t i o n r a t e o f human Ss w i l l
be s lo w e r (more " a n i m a l - l i k e " ) , and th e PRE w i l l be
s m a ll e r o r e l i m i n a t e d e n t i r e l y . R e s is ta n c e to e x t i n c t i o n ,
i n o t h e r w o rd s, w i l l be s i m i l a r f o r Ss c o n d itio n e d u n d e r
CRF and PRP s c h e d u l e s . Many o f th e e x p e rim e n ts from
S p e n c e ’s l a b o r a t o r y w ere d i r e c t e d t o a s o l u t i o n o f th e
f i r s t h a l f o f t h e p r e m is e , what m a n ip u la tio n s w i l l make
human Ss e x t i n g u i s h slo w ly l i k e a n im a ls? P a r t i a l r e i n f o r c e
ment p e r se was n o t a p rim a ry a r e a o f i n t e r e s t to Spence
and h i s a s s o c i a t e s .
One o f th e e a r l i e s t te c h n iq u e s d e sig n e d t o r e
duce th e d i f f e r e n c e betw een a c q u i s i t i o n and e x t i n c t i o n
t r i a l s was th e use o f " M c A llis te r t r i a l s " (S pence, 1963) .
M c A llis te r (1953) c o n d itio n e d th e S s ’ e y e l i d re s p o n s e
u n d er th e s t a n d a r d a c q u i s i t i o n p ro c e d u re b u t e x ti n g u i s h e d i t
by p r e s e n t i n g th e UCS 2500 m sec, a f t e r th e CS, an i n t e r v a l
a t which i t was th o u g h t l i t t l e o r no c o n d it i o n in g to o k !
i
p l a c e . When th e e x t i n c t i o n cu rve showed a s t r i k i n g l y j
slow d e c l i n e , M c A l l is te r advanced a "D riv e H y p o th e sis" t o |
I
!e x p l a i n th e d a t a . U sing th e UCS d u rin g e x t i n c t i o n a p p a r e n t !
j
ly f u l f i l l e d a n e c e s s a r y p r e r e q u i s i t e f o r slow e x t i n c t i o n !
j
i n human Ss— m ain ten a n ce o f d r i v e l e v e l . i
R eynolds (1958) s a i d th e i n c l u s i o n o f th e UCS
1
d u r in g e x t i n c t i o n p ro b a b ly s e r v e s two f u n c t i o n s : n o t o n ly j
(a) m a in t a i n in g th e d r i v e - l e v e l o f th e S s, b u t a l s o (b) j
r e d u c in g the. p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t th e s h i f t from acqui s i t i o n j
6
t o e x t i n c t i o n t r i a l s was n o t i c e d by th e S s , I n a d d i t i o n ,
i t was s u g g e s te d t h a t what M c A l l is te r had r e a l l y demon
s t r a t e d was t h a t r e s p o n s e s o f th e PRP Ss c o u ld be made
more r e s i s t a n t t o e x t i n c t i o n s i n c e th e o n ly group t e s t e d
was an 80$ r e i n f o r c e m e n t o ne, R e y n o ld ’ s stu d y was a com
p a r i s o n o f a CRP g ro u p -a n d a 60% PRF g ro u p , b u t th e
PRF was a m o d if ie d one i n t h a t th e UCS was p r e s e n t on
a l l c o n d i t i o n i n g t r i a l s . The PRF group r e c e i v e d 60
r e i n f o r c e d t r i a l s a t a CS-UCS i n t e r v a l o f 500 m sec, and
40 " n o n r e in f o r c e d " t r i a l s a t a CS-UCS i n t e r v a l o f 2500
m sec. F o llo w in g a c q u i s i t i o n , th e Ss from th e CRF and
PRF groups w ere a s s i g n e d t o one o f two e x t i n c t i o n p r o
c e d u r e s , th e s t a n d a r d method ( o m is s io n o f th e UCS) and
t h e M c A llis te r m ethod. A n aly ses o f th e e x t i n c t i o n d a ta
r e v e a l e d t h a t th e PRF Ss e x t i n g u i s h e d w ith M c A llis te r '
t r i a l s re sp o n d e d a t a c o n s i s t e n t l y h i g h e r l e v e l th a n th e
o t h e r t h r e e g r o u p s , a l l o f whom e x t i n g u i s h e d a t th e same
r a t e .
The d i f f e r e n c e betw een th e two PRF groups i n
R e y n o ld ’s s tu d y Spence (S p en ce, R u tle d g e , & T a l b o t t ,
! 1964) a t t r i b u t e d t o d i f f e r e n c e s betw een d i s c r i m i n a b i l i t y
o f c o n d i t i o n s . T hat i s , a s h i f t from an a c q u i s i t i o n
s c h e d u le t h a t i n v o lv e d a lo n g CS-UCS i n t e r v a l 40$ o f th e
I tim e t o an e x t i n c t i o n s c h e d u le w ith a l l lo n g CS-UCS i n t e r -
!
jv a ls was more d i f f i c u l t f o r PRF Ss t o d i s c r i m i n a t e th a n
an e x t i n c t i o n s c h e d u le o f no UCS on any t r i a l . However,
7
th e f a i l u r e o f b o th R eynolds (1958) and Spence et_ a l
(S p en ce, R u tle d g e , & T a l b o t t j 1964) t o f i n d d i f f e r e n c e s b e
tw een th e two CRF g rou ps was "somewhat e m b a rra s s in g "
(p . 290) u n l e s s t h e change i n CS d u r a t i o n from a c q u i s i t i o n
was as e f f e c t i v e an e x t i n c t i o n cue as UCS o m is s io n . On
t h e b a s i s o f th e two s t u d i e s , Spence co n clu d ed t h a t a
sim p le d r i v e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f e x t i n c t i o n r e s u l t s was
i n a d e q u a t e .
F o llo w in g up th e p r o p o s i t i o n t h a t CS d u r a t i o n
may be a cue f o r th e s h i f t o v e r from a c q u i s i t i o n to ex
t i n c t i o n , S p e n c e, Homzie, and R u tle d g e (1964) i n E x p er
im ent I o f t h e i r r e p o r t c o n d it i o n e d and e x t i n g u i s h e d Ss j
j
w ith a CS d u r a t i o n o f 2500 m sec. D uring e x t i n c t i o n Group j
I had th e UCS d i s c o n t i n u e d ; Group I I had th e CS-UCS
i n t e r v a l e x te n d e d t o 2500 m sec; and Group I I I had t h e |
i
CS-UCS i n t e r v a l e x te n d e d t o 1500 m sec. Group I e x - j
t i n g u i s h e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y f a s t e r t h a n Groups I I and I I I
and d ro p p ed to a 10# random l e v e l o f re s p o n d in g a f t e r !
two n o n r e i n f o r c e m e n t s . Groups I I and I I I d i d n ’t drop
t o th e 10# l e v e l i n 30 t r i a l s . T here seems t o be some
i n c o n s i s t e n c y i n S p e n c e ’s d e f i n i t i o n o f "random l e v e l
jo f r e s p o n d i n g ." In e a r l i e r s t u d i e s ( i . e . , Humphreys, 1939; |
I j
!G rant & S c h i p p e r , 1952; R e y n o ld s, 1958) th e te rm "random"
! ■ '
Iwas a p p l i e d to a 20# l e v e l o f re s p o n d in g ; i n more
I
■.recent work th e te rm "random" i s a p p l i e d to a 10# l e v e l o f ;
I
{ re sp o n d in g . B ecause o f th e two d i f f e r e n t d e f i n i t i o n s , an j
8
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f r e s u l t s rem ain s am biguous. F or
e xam p le, i n th e S p e n c e, Homzie, and R u tle d g e r e s e a r c h
(1964) an i n s p e c t i o n o f t h e i r F i g . 1 r e v e a l s t h a t
Groups I I and I I I re s p o n d e d a t th e 20# l e v e l on e x t i n c t i o n
t r i a l s 7 - 8 , th e e x a c t p o i n t a t w hich H um phreys’s and
G ra n t and S c h i p p e r 's CRF group s re s p o n d e d a t a 20# l e v e l .
A r e a s o n a b l e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f th e d a t a , i f t h e same
d e f i n i t i o n o f "random l e v e l " i s u s e d , i s t h a t c e r t a i n
m a n i p u l a t io n s o f th e C S -d u r a tio n v a r i a b l e i n c r e a s e
r e s i s t a n c e o n ly when d i f f e r e n t gro u p s a re compared w i t h i n
th e same e x p e r im e n t.
P r i c e , A b b o tt, and Vandament (1965) q u e s t i o n
S p e n c e 's v ie w p o in t t h a t CS d u r a t i o n i s a r e l e v a n t f a c t o r
i n e x t i n c t i o n . The e x p e r im e n te r s s t u d i e d CRF Ss i n e x
t i n c t i o n u n d e r s i x c o n d i t i o n s . The e x t i n c t i o n groups
were o r t h o g o n a l c o m b in a tio n s o f t h r e e CS c o n d i t i o n s and
two UCS c o n d i t i o n s : t h e UCS was d e la y e d o r o m itte d ; th e
CS d u r a t i o n rem a in e d u n c h an g e d , was s h o r t e n e d , o r was
l e n g t h e n e d . The CS d u r a t i o n d id n o t have a s i g n i f i c a n t
j
I e f f e c t on e x t i n c t i o n , b u t th e d e la y e d UCS d id l e a d t o
|s lo w e r e x t i n c t i o n . P r i c e e t al_ s u g g e s t t h a t d r i v e l e v e l
e f f e c t s o f th e UCS s h o u ld be s t u d i e d f u r t h e r .
R e ce n t i n v e s t i g a t i o n s have c e n t e r e d on th e
i
|e f f i c a c y o f embedding th e e y e l i d c o n d i t i o n i n g w i t h i n th e
| s e t t i n g o f a p r o b a b i l i t y l e a r n i n g t a s k . T h is m asking
I t e c h n iq u e was f i r s t u se d i n E xp erim en t I I o f t h e S p e n c e ,
9
Homzie, and R u tle d g e 1964 s t u d y . The e x p e rim e n t In v o lv e d
p r i m a r i l y a co m pariso n o f th e e x t i n c t i o n r a t e o f Group I I
o f t h e f i r s t e x p e rim e n t and a new Group IV. The l a t t e r
group was c o n d it i o n e d and e x t i n g u i s h e d e x a c t l y l i k e
Group I I e x c e p t t h a t th e p r o b a b i l i t y l e a r n i n g t a s k was
ad d ed . The Ss i n Group IV a t t a i n e d a lo w er a c q u i s i t i o n
l e v e l (a r a t h e r t y p i c a l f i n d i n g i n th e m asking s i t u a t i o n )
b u t showed r e l a t i v e l y slo w e r e x t i n c t i o n . The p e r c e n ta g e
o f Ss i n each group t h a t r e c o g n iz e d th e change i n th e
UCS, i t s o m is sio n o r d e la y , was: Group I , 84$; Group I I ,
76$; Group I I I , 48$; and Group IV, 4$. The m agn itu de
o f th e d i f f e r e n c e s ampng Groups I , I I , and I I I i s n o t com-
■
p l e t e l y i n a c c o rd w ith d i f f e r e n c e s i n e x t i n c t i o n j
p e rfo rm a n c e , b u t th e low p e r c e n ta g e s c o r e o f Group IV i
does add s u p p o r t to th e i d e a t h a t a n e g a t iv e r e l a t i o n s h i p !
e x i s t s betw een such r e c o g n i t i o n and th e p e r s i s t e n c e o f !
th e CR i n e x t i n c t i o n .
An e x p e rim e n t by G o l d s t e in (1962) i s more r e l e
v a n t to th e p r e s e n t PRE r e s e a r c h s i n c e i t was co n ce rn e d
w ith CRF Ss and 60$ PRF Ss i n a m asking s i t u a t i o n , and
t h e i r d i f f e r i n g r e s p o n s e s u nder two e x t i n c t i o n p r o c e d u r e s :
i
}
|( a ) o m i t t i n g th e UCS, and (b) e x te n d in g th e CS-UCS
j ;
!i n t e r v a l . P re v io u s work (R e y n o ld s, 1958; Spence, R u t le d g e ,;
j& T a l b o t t , 1964) had f a i l e d to f i n d d i f f e r e n c e s i n th e two :
j i
CRF g ro ups u n d e r s t a n d a r d p r o c e d u r e s . However, G o l d s t e in !
re a s o n e d i f i n h i b i t o r y s e t i s n o t o p e r a t i v e i n th e m asking 1
10
s i t u a t i o n , t h e n d i f f e r e n c e s s h o u ld be o b t a i n e d when, th e
d r i v e l e v e l s vary i n e x t i n c t i o n . The r e s u l t s a g re e d w ith
t h e a s s u m p tio n . The CRF g ro u p t h a t h ad t h e UCS p r e s e n t
d u r in g e x t i n c t i o n p e rfo rm e d a t a much h i g h e r l e v e l
th a n t h e CRF group t h a t had th e UCS d i s c o n t i n u e d .. The same
e f f e c t s w ere o b ta in e d f o r t h e two PRF g r o u p s . However,
when t h e d a t a were a n a ly z e d f o r th e PRE, th e f i n d i n g s
were n o t e q u iv o c a l . Under t h e m ask ing s i t u a t i o n
d i s c r i m i n a b i l i t y s h o u ld be e q u a l iz e d f o r t h e CRF and PRF
g ro u p s , and no PRE s h o u ld be e v i d e n t . A lthough t h e r e
was no d i f f e r e n c e i n th e e x t i n c t i o n c u rv e s o f th e CRF
and PRF groups who had th e UCS o m i t t e d , th e r e s u l t s were
l e s s c l e a r c u t i n t h e c ase o f th e CRF and PRF g ro u p s who
had t h e d e la y e d UCS. When a b s o l u t e r e s p o n s e l e v e l d u r in g
e x t i n c t i o n i s c o n s i d e r e d , t h e d i f f e r e n c e s betw een th e
two U C S -included g ro u p s w ere s m a ll, as was th e d i f f e r e n c e
b e tw een th e two U C S -om itted g ro u p s . When r e s p o n s e l e v e l
d u r in g e x t i n c t i o n r e l a t i v e t o t h e f i n a l a c q u i s i t i o n l e v e l
i s c o n s i d e r e d , th e d i f f e r e n c e betw een th e PRF and CRF
grou ps w ith UCS i n c l u d e d became f a i r l y l a r g e , w ith th e PRF
jgroup p e rfo rm in g a t a much h i g h e r l e v e l .
i
S p e n c e ’s 1966 e x p e rim e n t d e a l i n g o n ly w ith CRF
g ro u p s r e p r e s e n t s a f u r t h e r r e f in e m e n t o f t h e m asking
t e c h n i q u e . In a c q u i s i t i o n a l l g ro u p s w ere p r e s e n t e d th e
j p a i r e d CS-UCS on h a l f o f t h e g u e s s in g t r i a l s and n e i t h e r
i
1
[the CS n o t.th e .U C S on th e o t h e r h a l f o f th e t r i a l s . ....
11
D u rin g e x t i n c t i o n Group I had th e CS p r e s e n t e d a lo n e on
a random h a l f o f th e t r i a l s and th e UCS a lo n e on th e o t h e r
h a l f ; Group I I had th e CS p r e s e n t e d a lo n e on h a l f th e
t r i a l s and n e i t h e r th e CS n o r th e UCS on th e o t h e r h a l f
o f th e t r i a l s ; Group I I I had th e d e la y e d CS-UCS
i n t e r v a l on h a l f o f th e t r i a l s and n e i t h e r th e CS n o r th e
UCS on th e o t h e r h a l f o f t h e t r i a l s . Group I I I e x t i n g
u i s h e d th e s l o w e s t , f o llo w e d by Group I , t h e n Group I I .
The d i f f e r e n c e betw een Group I and I I was s i g n i f i c a n t
beyond t h e .0 1 l e v e l . A d is a d v a n ta g e o f th e d e la y e d UCS
te c h n iq u e became a p p a r e n t i n t h e G o l d s t e i n ( 1962) and
!
Spence ( 196 6) e x p e r im e n ts , w here th e S_s n o t only e x t i n g - !
u i s h e d v e ry s lo w ly , b u t p r o b a b ly d id n o t e x t i n g u i s h a t a l l . I
I n f a c t , i t i s l i k e l y t h a t some Ss w ere b e in g c o n d it i o n e d a i
i
i
2500 m s e c ., an i n t e r v a l f o r m e r ly th o u g h t n o t to p ro d u c e
e y e l i d c o n d i t i o n i n g .
A r e c e n t e x p e rim e n t by Spence and P l a t t ( 196 7) !
was c o n ce rn e d s p e c i f i c a l l y w ith th e PRE. Again t h e
m asking t a s k was em ployed. The CRP group r e c e i v e d 59 i
j p a ir e d t r i a l s w ith a CS-UCS i n t e r v a l o f 500 msec, and
I
! I
60 game o nly t r i a l s . The PRF group a l s o had 59 r e i n
f o r c e d t r i a l s , i n t e r s p e r s e d w ith 60 d e la y e d UCS t r i a l s on
w hich th e UCS was p r e s e n t e d 2500 m sec, a f t e r CS o n s e t ,
and 120 game a lo n e t r i a l s . E x t i n c t i o n f o r b o th g ro u p s
c o n s i s t e d o f 70 CS a lo n e t r i a l s i n te r m i x e d w ith 70 UCS
a lo n e t r i a l s . The r e s u l t s showed no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e .
12
i n e i t h e r a c q u i s i t i o n o r e x t i n c t i o n b e tw ee n th e two g ro u p s ,
a f i n d i n g w hich Spence and P l a t t i n t e r p r e t e d as due t o
th e a b se n c e o f t h e c o g n i t i v e s e t . However, a t th e end
o f th e a r t i c l e th e y p o i n t o u t t h a t th e use o f th e d e la y e d
UCS p r o c e d u r e does n o t p ro v id e f o r n o n re in fo rc e m e n t e f f e c t s
as i t does i n t h e s t a n d a r d e x p e rim e n t. W hether th e
u s u a l te c h n iq u e o f o m i t t i n g th e UCS f o r PRP Ss i n t h e
c o n te x t o f th e m asking t a s k would change t h e i r a c q u i s i t i o n
and e x t i n c t i o n l e v e l s s t i l l rem ain s u n i n v e s t i g a t e d .
I n c o n c l u s i o n , i t a p p e a rs t h a t th e f i r s t h a l f
o f S p e n c e ’s t h i r d p rem ise i s s u p p o r te d : when d i s c r i m i n a b i l -
i
i t y betw een a c q u i s i t i o n and e x t i n c t i o n i s m in im iz ed , j
!
r e s i s t a n c e to e x t i n c t i o n o f human Ss w i l l be s lo w e r . I
I
Problem a r e a s do re m a in — e . g . , th e l i k e l i h o o d o f Ss b e in g j
c o n d itio n e d a t 2500 m sec, CS-UCS i n t e r v a l s , th e i n c o n s i s t
ency o f "random l e v e l " d e f i n i t i o n s , th e low er a c q u i s i t i o n i
l e v e l s i n many c a s e s i n t h e m asking s i t u a t i o n , and t h e
p a u c i t y o f r e p o r t s from t h e Ss as t o t h e i r knowledge o f t h e
CS-UCS r e l a t i o n s h i p s .
Somewhat l e s s s u p p o r t i s g iv e n t o th e second
h a l f o f t h e p re m is e : when d i s c r i m i n a b i l i t y i s m in im iz ed ,
th e PRE w i l l be s m a ll e r o r e l i m i n a t e d e n t i r e l y . The
p rim a ry r e a s o n f o r th e i n c o n c l u s i v e s t a te m e n t a b o u t th e
PRE i s t h a t only t h r e e e x p e rim e n ts ( G o l d s t e i n , 1962;
R ey n o ld s, 1958; Spence & P l a t t , 1967) employed a CRP-PRP
com parison when d i s c r i m i n a b i l i t y was m a n ip u la te d .
13
was c o n d u c te d w ith a s t a n d a r d c o n d i t i o n i n g s i t u a t i o n f o r
b o th CRF and PRF g r o u p s , and none m a n ip u la te d o n ly ex
t i n c t i o n c o n d i t i o n s . The l a c k o f th e l a t t e r ty p e o f
p r o c e d u r e makes co m p a riso n s a c r o s s v a r i o u s e x p e rim e n ts
more d i f f i c u l t . F u r th e r m o r e , i n a l l t h e .- e y e l i d c o n d i t
i o n in g e x p e rim e n ts e x c e p t one (Spence & P l a t t , 1967) PRF
Ss h ad a lo w e r a c q u i s i t i o n l e v e l th a n CRF S s. Whereas
e a r l i e r s t u d i e s d id n o t c o r r e c t f o r t h e s e d i f f e r e n c e s ,
R eynolds (1958) and G o l d s t e in ( 1962) d id by e x p r e s s in g
th e d a t a as p e r c e n t a g e s o f th e f i n a l p e rfo rm a n c e l e v e l j
' l
d u r in g c o n d i t i o n i n g . A c co rd in g t o A nderson ( 19 6 3 ) , j
j
g ro u p s must be e q u a l i z e d a t th e b e g in n in g o f e x t i n c t i o n , o r j
th e q u e s t i o n o f d i f f e r e n t i a l r e s i s t a n c e w i l l n o t have a i
s a t i s f a c t o r y a n s w e r. He a l s o adds t h a t t h e m ost commonly |
u se d c o r r e c t i o n p r o c e d u r e s have l i m i t e d m e r i t . 1
The PRE i n GSR C o n d itio n in g R e se a rc h , j
I f t h e i m p l i c a t i o n s o f a th e o r y a r e t o be t e s t e d
u n d e r a d i f f e r e n t r e s p o n s e s y s te m , t h e n an e f f o r t s h o u ld
be made t o show t h a t t h e b a s i c p re m is e s o f t h a t th e o r y
h o ld f o r b o th r e s p o n s e m ea su re s t o a s i m i l a r e x t e n t . In
o t h e r w o rd s, a r e t h e e f f e c t s o f PRF th e same i n GSR con
d i t i o n i n g as i n e y e l i d d o n d i ti o n i n g ? Do PRF Ss i n GSR
c o n d i t i o n i n g e x p e r im e n ts show a lo w e r l e v e l o f re s p o n d in g
jin a c q u i s i t i o n b u t a g r e a t e r r e s i s t a n c e t o e x t i n c t i o n
i . ;
Ithan CRF Ss?
14
Much GSR c o n d i t i o n i n g i s done u n d e r a PRP s c h e d u l e
f o r t h e s im p le r e a s o n t h a t t e s t t r i a l s a r e i n s e r t e d i n t o
t h e a c q u i s i t i o n s e r i e s . However, few GSR e x p e r im e n ts
h a v e com pared CRP and PRP g ro u p s d i r e c t l y i n o r d e r t o i n -
v e s t i g a t e t h e PRE. A g a in , Humphreys (1940) p e rfo rm e d t h e
c l a s s i c e x p e rim e n t i n t h e a r e a . Humphreys c o n d i t i o n e d a
CRP g ro u p an d a 50$ PRP g ro u p t o a CS to n e w i t h a CS-UCS
i n t e r v a l o f 400 m sec. The p r o c e d u r e c o n s i s t e d o f 8
a d a p t a t i o n t r i a l s , 16 a c q u i s i t i o n t r i a l s , and 8 e x t i n c t i o n
t r i a l s . The d a t a show t h a t t h e m a g n itu d e o f t h e GSR was
!
t h e same f o r th e two g ro u p s a t t h e end o f a c q u i s i t i o n , a s
m e a su re d on t h e f i r s t e x t i n c t i o n t r i a l . In e x t i n c t i o n t h e
CRP Ss showed a r a p i d d e c l i n e i n r e s p o n d i n g and d ro p p e d
t o t h e i r a d a p t a t i o n l e v e l hy t h e e i g h t h t r i a l . The PRP
Ss had an i n c r e a s e in t h e m a g n itu d e o f t h e i r r e s p o n s e s —
d ro p p e d o f f more s l o w l y . Humphreys c o n c lu d e d t h a t th e
r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e t h a t i t was more d i f f i c u l t f o r t h e 50$ ,, !
Ss to fo rm an " e x p e c ta n c y " o f c o n ti n u e d n o n r e i n f o r c e m e n t . |
The PRP g ro u p was n o t o n ly more r e s i s t a n t t o e x t i n c t i o n 1
h u t a l s o showed a g r e a t e r g e n e r a l i z a t i o n o f r e s p o n s e s , a s •
i ;
|e v id e n c e d on g e n e r a l i z a t i o n t e s t t r i a l s i n s e r t e d i n th e
I '
e x t i n c t i o n t r i a l s . G r e a t e r g e n e r a l i z a t i o n hy th e PRP
i
g ro u p s u g g e s t s l e s s d i s c r i m i n a t i o n o f t h e change fro m
S a c q u i s i t i o n t o e x t i n c t i o n a rid /o r a l e s s e r d e g re e o f know-
i ;
’l e d g e o f t h e CS-UCS r e l a t i o n s h i p d u r i n g c o n d i t i o n i n g .
i 1
15
An e x p e rim e n t by G r a n t, M eyer, and Hake (1950)
re s e m b le s H um phreys's i n t h a t th e r a t e o f e x t i n c t i o n was
d i s t i n c t l y l e s s f o r PRP g ro u p s th a n i n e a r l i e r e x p e rim e n ts
on w hich a l l t r i a l s w ere r e i n f o r c e d . However, th e e x p e r
im e n te r s u s e d a v e ry e l a b o r a t e d e s ig n so t h a t t h e i r r e
s u l t s a r e n o te d f o r a m b ig u ity r a t h e r th a n a p o s i t i v e
s u p p o r t o f a PRE i n GSR c o n d i t i o n i n g . Each ,S _ was g iv e n
10 a d a p t a t i o n t r i a l s fo llo w e d by one o f 25 d i f f e r e n t
t r i a l se q u e n c e s and 10 e x t i n c t i o n t r i a l s . The 25 s e
q u e n ce s form a 5 X 5 f a c t o r i a l d e s i g n i n w hich th e f i v e !
rows were 0, 5* 10 , 1 5 a and 20 r e i n f o r c e d t r i a l s o r t h o - j
j
g o n a l t o 0 , 5 a 10, 1 5 a and 20 n o n r e i n f o r c e d t r i a l s . I n ;
|
s p i t e o f t h e l a r g e o v e r a l l N, e x t i n c t i o n s c o r e s were n o t j
r e l i a b l e enough t o g iv e a good p i c t u r e o f th e f u n c t i o n
r e l a t i n g r e s i s t a n c e to e x t i n c t i o n t o th e p r o p o r t i o n o f
r e i n f o r c e d t r i a l s . I f a n y t h i n g , t h e s c o r e s s u g g e s te d t h a t
th e maximum o f t h e f u n c t i o n o c c u rs a t l e s s t h a n 50$
r e i n f o r c e m e n t .
M e r i t s e r and D o e r f l e r (195*0, u n l i k e th e o t h e r
GSR e x p e r i m e n t e r s , u se d a t h r e e - s e c o n d d e la y CS-UCS i n -
i
t e r v a l . I n s t e a d o f a c o n s t a n t number o f t r i a l s i n a c q u i s i t
io n and e x t i n c t i o n , M e r i t s e r £t_ al_ form ed a c r i t e r i o n f o r
CRs b a se d on th e s l o p e , a m p litu d e , and l a t e n c y o f th e GSR.
When t h r e e c o n s e c u t iv e r e s p o n s e s met th e c r i t e r i o n d u r in g
a c q u i s i t i o n , th e GSR was c o n s id e r e d c o n d it i o n e d , and e x
t i n c t i o n was s t a r t e d . I n e x t i n c t i o n when two c o n s e c u t iv e ;
16
r e s p o n s e s f a i l e d to m eet t h e c r i t e r i o n e x t i n c t i o n was
c o n s id e r e d co m p lete . The r e s u l t s showed a s i g n i f i c a n t
d i f f e r e n c e a t th e .0 5 l e v e l b etw een th e CRF and PRF S s,
w ith th e 40$ group b e in g more r e s i s t a n t t o e x t i n c t i o n .
No s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s were found t o e x i s t betw een th e
number o f re s p o n s e s o b t a i n e d by t h e d i f f e r e n t modes o f
a c q u i s i t i o n .
Ottly one GSR stu d y com paring CRF and PRF g roups
m a n ip u la te d d i s c r i m i n a b i l i t y . E r id g e r and Mandel (1965)
s o u g h t t o a b o l i s h t h e PRE n o t by making th e t r a n s i t i o n
b e tw ee n a c q u i s i t i o n and e x t i n c t i o n l e s s d i s c r i m i n a b l e f o r
th e Ss b u t by making th e t r a n s i t i o n more d i s c r i m i n a b l e .
In o t h e r w o rd s, the i n t e n t o f th e m a n ip u la tio n s was n o t
t o make t h e CRF group more r e s i s t a n t t o e x t i n c t i o n l i k e
t h e Spence w ork, b u t to make th e PRF g ro up l e s s r e s i s t a n t
t o e x t i n c t i o n , more l i k e th e CRF g ro u p . E ig h ty Ss were
d iv id e d i n t o f o u r g r o u p s , two CRF grou ps and two 25% PRF
g ro u p s . The p ro c e d u r e c o n s i s t e d o f 5 a d a p t a t i o n t r i a l s ,
20 a c q u i s i t i o n t r i a l s , and 30 e x t i n c t i o n t r i a l s . The
CS-UCS i n t e r v a l was 500 m sec. T here w ere f i v e CSs, eac h
o f w hich was a f l a s h of l i g h t from a 25 w a tt b u lb .
i
Im m e d ia tely f o l lo w in g a c q u i s i t i o n , one CRF group and one
PRF group w ere in fo rm ed t h a t e x t i n c t i o n would be i n i t i a t e d .
I
jFor th e In fo rm ed S s , th e E r e t u r n e d t o th e e x p e r im e n ta l
room, removed th e sh o c k e l e c t r o d e s , and a s s u r e d S _ t h a t no
f u r t h e r shock s c o u ld or vrould be g iv e n . The two re m a in in g
17
groups w ere l e f t u n in fo rm e d . B r id g e r and M a n d e l's e x p e r
im ent d i f f e r e d from t h e o t h e r c i t e d GSR work i n t h a t a
d i s c r i m i n a t i o n c o n d i t i o n i n g p a ra d ig m was u s e d . However,
th e d i s c r i m i n a t i o n s e tu p was n o t th e u s u a l t y p e . F i r s t ,
th e d i s c r i m i n a t i o n problem was a s p a t i a l , o r s im u lt a n e o u s ,
one as c o n t r a s t e d to th e s u c c e s s i v e ty p e u s u a l l y em ployed.
Second, i t was a d i s c r i m i n a t i o n p rob lem i n name o n ly ;
th e Ss w ere in fo rm e d t h a t th e CS+ ( r e i n f o r c e d CS) would a l
ways be t h e l e f t l i g h t . The p rim a ry and p e rh a p s th e only
f u n c t i o n o f th e d i f f e r e n t i a l c o n d i t i o n i n g p r o c e d u r e was
i t s u se as a c o n t r o l f o r p s e u d o c o n d i t io n i n g and s e n s i t i
z a t i o n . B r i d g e r and M andel’ s d e f i n i t i o n o f "one t r i a l "
was a l s o u n iq u e ; one t r i a l was th e random p r e s e n t a t i o n o f
f i v e l i g h t s , f o u r n o n r e i n f o r c e d CSs (CS-) and one r e i n - j
f o r c e d CS (CS+) s e p a r a t e d by a v a r i a b l e i n t e r v a l o f 10 t o I
i
(
20 s e c o n d s . I
The r e s u l t s o f th e B r id g e r and Mandel s tu d y C1965)
w ere: no PRE f o r th e In fo rm e d g r o u p s , t h e PRE f o r th e
N oninform ed g ro u p s . The e x p e r i m e n t e r s , on t h e b a s i s o f
t h e i r f i n d i n g s , h y p o t h e s iz e t h a t th e C R. has two s e p a r a t e
|com ponents— a sim p le one and a m e d ia te d one o f a n t i c i p a t -
I
lion o r f e a r , b o th com ponents b e in g b a s e d on th e number
! i
iof CS-UCS p a i r i n g s . The i n f o r m a t i v e i n s t r u c t i o n s and th e
rem oval o f shock c o n tin g e n c y cues e l i m i n a t e d t h e m e d ia te d
|CR f o r th e Info rm ed g ro u p s , l e a v in g o n ly th e sim p le CR.
IThe a u th o r s a l s o compared, t h e r e l e v a n c e o f t h e i r r e s u l t s ---------- 1
18
w ith t h e r a t i o n a l e b e h in d th e G ra n t and S c h ip p e r (1952)
e y e l i d c o n d i t i o n i n g e x p e r im e n t. A cco rd in g t o G ran t and
S c h i p p e r , r e s i s t a n c e t o e x t i n c t i o n i s d i r e c t l y r e l a t e d
t o th e number o f r e i n f o r c e d t r i a l s , o r h a b i t s t r e n g t h ,
and i n v e r s e l y r e l a t e d t o t h e d i s c r i m i n a b i l i t y o f
a c q u i s i t i o n from e x t i n c t i o n . Under t h e i r h y p o t h e s is
G ran t and S c h ip p e r p r e d i c t t h a t when d i s c r i m i n a b i l i t y
i s e q u a l i z e d , CRF g ro u p s would show g r e a t e r r e s i s t a n c e t o
e x t i n c t i o n b e c a u se o f th e l a r g e r number o f r e i n f o r c e m e n t s .
The B r id g e r and Mandel r e s u l t s do n o t u p h o ld th e d e d u c t
i o n , b u t i n a n o n p a ra m e tric a n a l y s i s o f th e 30 e x t i n c t i o n
t r i a l s , t h e r e was a s t a t i s t i c a l l y n o n s i g n i f i c a n t te n d e n c y
f o r th e In fo rm e d CRF group t o show g r e a t e r r e s i s t a n c e
t o e x t i n c t i o n th a n t h e In fo rm ed PRF g ro u p . A ssessm ent o f
d i s c r i m i n a b i l i t y was c h eck ed by p o s t e x p e r i m e n t a l q u e s t
i o n i n g o f a l l S_s. Any In fo rm ed S who i n d i c a t e d he was
•not p o s i t i v e no more shocks would be r e c e i v e d was e lim
i n a t e d .
! B r id g e r and Mandel (1965) assume t h a t when d i s
c r i m i n a b i l i t y i s h i g h , i t i s th e r e d u c t i o n o f th e f e a r
i
'd riv e t h a t a c c o u n ts f o r f a s t e x t i n c t i o n . Spence, how-
i
I
jever, t h e o r i z e s t h a t when d i s c r i m i n a b i l i t y i s h i g h , a
n e g a t i v e s e t i s o p e r a t i v e ; and i t i s th e i n h i b i t i o n of
h a b i t s t r e n g t h t h a t a c c o u n ts f o r f a s t e x t i n c t i o n . The
two ty p e s o f r e a s o n i n g can be r e s t a t e d i n th e h a b i t
s t r e n g t h (H) X d r i v e (D) fo rm u la form :
19
B r id g e r and M an d el: E x t i n c t i o n p e rfo rm a n c e =
H X d (D rive r e d u c e d ) .
Spence: E x t i n c t i o n p e rfo rm an e = h X D (H a b it
r e d u c e d ) .
I n e i t h e r c a s e t h e i n h i b i t i o n o f H o r t h e r e
d u c tio n o f D c a n n o t be com p lete i f a n y . re s p o n d in g i s to
o c c u r s in c e a zero CO) s u b s t i t u t e d f o r H o r D l e a d s t o
z e ro p e rfo rm a n c e . Under e i t h e r e x p l a n a t i o n , t h e p r e d i c t e d
p e rfo rm an ce o f Ss c o n d it i o n e d u n d e r t h e same s c h e d u le ,
CRF 03? PRF w i l l be t h e same s i n c e i n th e Spence c l a s s i c a l
c o n d i t i o n i n g t h e o r y th e sum o f UCS p r e s e n t a t i o n s con
t r i b u t e d b o th t o h a b i t s t r e n g t h and d r i v e (S p e n ce , 1958).
I t a l s o f o llo w s t h a t u n d e r e i t h e r e x p l a n a t i o n when d i s
c r i m i n a b i l i t y i s m a n ip u la te d and a co m p ariso n b etw een j
CRF and PRF Ss i s made, th e PRE w i l l d i s a p p e a r . I t i s
i
a l s o p r o b a b l e , a c c o r d in g t o t h i s S p e n c e ia n l i n e o f r e a s o n - ;
i n g , t h a t th e CRF group w i l l be more r e s i s t a n t t o - e x
t i n c t i o n , s i n c e i t s h a b i t s t r e n g t h i s b a se d on th e i
number o f r e i n f o r c e m e n t s . In t h e t y p i c a l e x p e r im e n t, th e
CRF group and th e PRF group a r e n o t e q u a te d f o r h a b i t o r
d r i v e , one o r b o th o f t h e s e f a c t o r s n o t b e in g th e same
f o r b o th g ro u p s . Even i n th e Hum phreys’ s s tu d y (1939)
i
where h a b i t and d r i v e were e q u a te d , i n h i b i t i o n b a se d on
I n o n r e in f o r c e d t r i a l s i s g r e a t e r f o r th e PRF g ro u p . The
| '
r e l a t i o n s h i p can be e x p r e s s e d i n fo rm u la form : E x t i n c t i o n j
p e rfo rm an c e = H X D . - I n , where n i s th e n u m b e r.o f non- j
20
r e i n f o r c e d t r i a l s * A gain, a lo w er l e v e l o f p e rfo rm a n c e
may r e s u l t f o r th e PRF S s .
To sum m arize t h e GSR e x p e r i m e n t a t io n on th e
PRE: from th e l i m i t e d number o f s t u d i e s c o n d u cted i n
t h e a r e a , i t a p p e a rs t h a t th e b a s i c p re m ise s o f S p e n c e 's
D i s c r i m i n a t i o n h y p o t h e s i s a r e s u p p o r te d when GSR i s th e
r e s p o n s e m e a su re . The GSR does e x t i n g u i s h r a p i d l y
(H um phreys, 1 9 4 0 ), and t h e PRE can be o b t a i n e d . W hether
t h e l e v e l o f r e s p o n d in g i s lo w e r f o r t h e PRP group i n
a c q u i s i t i o n . c a n n o t be a n sw e red d e f i n i t e l y b e c a u s e o f
t h e d i f f e r e n t m ethods em ployed i n th e c i t e d e x p e r im e n ts .
Humphreys (1940) showed th e PRP and CRP g ro u p s a t th e
i
same l e v e l a t th e end o f th e a c q u i s i t i o n t r i a l s . The
r e s u l t s o f M e r i t s e r and D o e r f l e r (1954) s u p p o r t H u m phreys',
b u t th e c r i t e r i o n f o r c o n d i t i o n i n g were u n u s u a l. A ccord-
i
i n g to A nderson (1963) t h e r e a r e s e v e r a l l i m i t a t i o n s and |
c a u t i o n s t o be k e p t i n mind when r e s e a r c h e r s t e r m i n a t e
a c q u i s i t i o n t r a i n i n g a t some p e rfo rm a n c e c r i t e r i o n i n an
a tte m p t t o e q u a te Ss on t e r m i n a l a c q u i s i t i o n r e s p o n s e s .
i
I The p r o c e d u r e , A nderson c o n t i n u e s , does n o t c o m p le te ly
e q u a te t h e Ss i n term s o f p e rfo rm a n c e and may c o m p lic a te
t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e r e s u l t s b e c a u s e o f s y s te m a t i c
d i f f e r e n c e s b e tw e e n th e c o n d itio n s , i n term s o f number
jo f r e i n f o r c e d and u n r e i n f o r c e d t r i a l s ( p . 1 7 2 ). The
i
|o t h e r two GSR s t u d i e s d i d n o t p r e s e n t a c q u i s i t i o n d a t a |
1
making i t im p o s s i b l e t o a s s e s s th e l e v e l s o f a c q u i s i t i o n f o r
21
t h e CRF and PRF g r o u p s . F i n a l l y , when d i s c r i m i n a b i l i t y ,
d e f i n e d by i n s t r u c t i o n s r e g a r d i n g e x t i n c t i o n ( B r id g e r &
M andel, 1965) , i s used as an in d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e , th e PRE
i s e l i m i n a t e d .
Com parison o f t h e GSR and th e E y e l i d R e sp o n se .
In th e p r e c e d i n g p a ra g r a p h s i t was s e e n t h a t
t h e GSR and e y e l i d re s p o n s e a p p e a r t o behave i n a s i m i l a r
f a s h i o n as f a r a s S p e n c e 's b a s i c p re m ise s go. When th e
GSR and e y e l i d r e s p o n s e s o f CRF and PRF Ss a r e compared
u n d e r s t a n d a r d a c q u i s i t i o n and e x t i n c t i o n p r o c e d u r e s ,
t h e PRF S_s e x t i n g u i s h more s lo w ly ; th e PRE i s e v id e n c e d .
When d i s c r i m i n a b i l i t y b etw een a c q u i s i t i o n and e x t i n c t i o n
i s m a n ip u la te d , th e PRE i s l e s s e n e d o r d i s a p p e a r s . T h ere
f o r e , i t seems t h a t t h e same m ethods o f in d e p e n d e n t
v a r i a t i o n can be a p p l i e d t o e i t h e r re s p o n s e sy ste m .
However, c e r t a i n d i f f e r e n c e s do e x i s t betw een
t h e two r e s p o n s e system s t h a t c o u ld make an e x a c t r e p l i
c a t i o n of a S p e n c eian e y e l i d c o n d i t i o n i n g e x p e rim e n t l e s s
th a n s a t i s f a c t o r y f o r a GSR c o n d i t i o n i n g s t u d y . F i r s t ,
jthe GSR can be c o n d i t i o n e d when a r e l a t i v e l y lon g d e la y
;CS-UCS i n t e r v a l i s u s e d ( G r in g s , L o c k h a r t, & Dameron,
1 9 6 2 ). A " M c A llis te r " t r i a l o f 2500 m sec, i n e x t i n c t i o n
1
! would n o t be s u i t a b l e f o r GSR w ork.
j S e c o n d ly , Spence ( 1966a , p , 447) s t a t e s t h a t
ias f a r as t h e a c q u i s i t i o n phase i s co n ce rn e d th e e y e l i d
22
c o n d i t i o n i n g e x p e r im e n ts a r e more o r l e s s f r e e from
c o g n i t i v e f a c t o r s * The same a s su m p tio n c a n n o t be made
w here GSR c o n d i t i o n i n g i s c o n ce rn e d ( G r in g s , 19 65) . As
G rin g s s t a t e s i t , " C o g n itiv e and p e r c e p t u a l v a r i a b l e s
re m a in t o c o m p lic a te th e human c o n d i t i o n i n g sc e n e " ( p . 8 5 ).
He f u r t h e r n o te s t h a t b e h a v i o r changes s i m i l a r t o CRs can
o c c u r from v e r b a l i s a t i o n s o r v e r b a l i n s t r u c t i o n s o r changes
i n S /s p e r c e p t i o n o f th e t o t a l e n v iro n m e n t, G ring s con
c lu d e s h i s a r t i c l e by s a y in g t h a t au to n o m ic c o n d i t i o n i n g
may in v o lv e - p r e p a r a t o r y m e d ia tin g b e h a v i o r , a p e r c e p t u a l
s e t f o r r e c e i v i n g t h e UCS,
Spence a l s o assum es t h a t " a w a re n e s s" o f c o n d i t i o n
i n g o c c u r s a t th e change from a c q u i s i t i o n t o e x t i n c t i o n ;
and b e c a u se o f th e su d d en knowledge Ss d e v e lo p a s e t n o t j
t o r e s p o n d . U n f o r t u n a t e l y , n o t enough e m p i r i c a l d a t a
have b e e n g a th e r e d t o s u b s t a n t i a t e S p e n c e ’ s a s s u m p tio n s . I
Q u e s tio n in g o f t h e Ss i n t h e e y e l i d e x p e rim e n ts h a s b een
l i m i t e d t o p o s t - e x p e r i m e n t a l i n t e r v i e w s t h a t a r e a f u n c t i o n .
o f r e c a l l , n o t o f im m e d ia te a w a re n e s s . F a c t o r s , su c h as
i n t e r p o l a t e d e x t i n c t i o n t r i a l s , c o u ld i n t e r f e r e w ith
|S s ’ r e c a l l o f t h e CS-UCS r e l a t i o n s h i p d u r in g a c q u i s i t i o n .
jF u rth e rm o re , P e r r y and Moore ( 1965) s u g g e s t t h a t
j d i s c r i m i n a b i l i t y may n o t be d e p e n d e n t on th e a b r u p t n e s s
jof th e t r a n s i t i o n o r th e co n g ru e n ce betw een th e p a t t e r n i n g 1
!of th e a c q u i s i t i o n t r i a l s and th e e x t i n c t i o n t r i a l s —
j t h a t i s , th e 1 3 ’ s a w a re n e ss o f th e change may n o t be ;
23
th e o n ly d e te r m in a n t o f r e s i s t a n c e t o e x t i n c t i o n . R e s i s
ta n c e t o e x t i n c t i o n may a l s o be a f u n c t i o n o f th e S_*-s~
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e change; t h e S " r e c o g n i z e s " th e
ch an g e, b u t w hat does i t mean?
One o f S p e n c e 's m ost e f f e c t i v e te c h n iq u e s t o
i n c r e a s e r e s i s t a n c e t o e x t i n c t i o n and e l i m i n a t e th e PRE
has b een c o n d i t i o n i n g th e e y e l i d re s p o n s e u n d e r a m asking
s i t u a t i o n . A lth oug h th e e y e l i d r e s p o n s e a t tim e s a t t a i n s
a lo w er a c q u i s i t i o n l e v e l under th e m asking p ro c e d u re
t h a n u n d er a s t a n d a r d p r o c e d u r e , th e i n v e s t i g a t o r s do
a p p a r e n t l y g e t c o n d i t i o n i n g . A r e c e n t stu d y o f GSR con
d i t i o n i n g (Dawson & G r in g s , 1968) showed t h a t u nd er
c e r t a i n m asking t a s k s , S_s do n o t c o n d i t i o n a t a l l .
F i n a l l y , u n l i k e t h e t y p i c a l GSR e x p e rim e n t,
t h e r e a r e no c o n t r o l grou ps f o r p s e u d o c o n d itio n in g o r
s e n s i t i z a t i o n u se d i n th e e y e l i d c o n d i t i o n i n g e x p e r im e n t.
CHAPTER I I I
SUMMARY OP THE PROBLEM
The p u rp o s e o f th e p r e s e n t r e s e a r c h was t o t e s t
t h e i m p l i c a t i o n s o f S p e n c e 's D i s c r i m i n a t i o n h y p o t h e s i s as
th e y p e r t a i n t o t h e PRE. The t e s t i n g was done u n d e r
c e r t a i n c o n s t r a i n t s imposed by th e n a t u r e o f t h e re s p o n s e
sy stem m easured* th e GSR.
The s p e c i f i c e x p e r i m e n t a l h y p o t h e s is c an be
th o u g h t o f as a c o r o l l a r y t o S p e n c e 's t h i r d b a s i c p re m is e :
When d i s c r i m i n a b i l i t y i s e q u a liz e d * t h e PRE i s re d u c e d
o r e l i m i n a t e d . The in d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e was d i s c r i m i n
a b i l i t y , d e f i n e d by two e x t i n c t i o n p r o c e d u r e s . T hree
m ain group s o f S_s were em ployed, two e x p e r im e n ta l groups
and a c o n t r o l g ro u p . Each e x p e r i m e n t a l group c o n s i s t e d
o f a CRP-PRF c o m p a ris o n . B ecause o f th e q u e s t i o n a b l e
e f f e c t s o f a m ask ing s t i u a t i o n w here t h e GSR i s c o n c e rn e d
and b e c a u se o f p ro b a b le s o u r c e s o f c o n fo u n d in g , th e
a c q u i s i t i o n t r i a l s were th e same f o r t h e two e x p e r im e n ta l
g ro u p s ; o n ly t h e e x t i n c t i o n p r o c e d u r e s v a r i e d . Under th e
I
d e sig n * t h e r e f o r e * th e in d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e had two
lv a lu e s: (a) t h e r e g u l a r group (Group R) was e x t i n g u i s h e d
u n d e r s t a n d a r d d i s c r i m i n a b i l i t y c o n d i t i o n s — CS a lo n e
t r i a l s ; (b) t h e e q u a l i z e d group (Group E) was e x t i n g u i s h e d
....... 24 _...
25
u n d e r e q u a l i z e d d i s c r i m i n a b i l i t y c o n d i t i o n s — m o d ifie d
" M c A l l is te r " t r i a l s .
The d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e was th e PRE, t h e
r e s i s t a n c e t o e x t i n c t i o n o f th e CRF and PRF S s , d e fin e d
by th e m ag n itu d e o f t h e GSR o v e r e x t i n c t i o n t r i a l s .
B ased on p r e v i o u s e x p e r i m e n t a t i o n , t h r e e p r e
d i c t i o n s were g e n e r a t e d from th e g e n e r a l h y p o t h e s i s :
1. Under th e s t a n d a r d d i s c r i m i n a b i l i t y
c o n d i t i o n s Group R w i l l show th e PRE.
2. Under t h e e q u a l i z e d d i s c r i m i n a b i l i t y con
d i t i o n s Group E w i l l show a re d u c e d PRE r e l a t i v e t o Group
R.
3. When d i s c r i m i n a b i l i t y i s e q u a l i z e d by
m o d if ie d " M c A llis te r " t r i a l s , Group E S_s w i l l e x t i n g u i s h
a s slo w ly as th e PRF Ss i n Group R.
CHAPTER IV
METHOD
S u b je c ts
The s u b j e c t s were J2 v o l u n t e e r u n d e rg r a d u a te
s t u d e n t s a t C a l i f o r n i a S t a t e C o lle g e a t Long B each. They
were p a id $1.00 f o r p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n t h e h o u r - lo n g
e x p e r im e n t. The d a ta o f e i g h t a d d i t i o n a l S_s were d i s
c a r d e d , s i x b e c a u se o f equipm ent f a i l u r e o r E e r r o r , and
two b e c a u se o f o v e r s e n s i t i v i t y t o th e chosen shock l e v e l .
T here were 45 m ales and 27 fe m a le s w ith th e sex r a t i o i
I
j
i n e a c h group b e in g k e p t a p p ro x im a te ly e q u a l . ;
D esign
The Ss were random ly a s s i g n e d t o one o f t h e
t h r e e g ro u p s: t h e r e g u l a r group (Group R), th e e q u a l i z e d
group (Group E ) , and th e p s e u d o c o n d i t io n i n g group (Group P ) .
There were 24 S_s i n eac h m a in -g ro u p . H a lf o f th e Ss i n
each e x p e r im e n ta l group (R-100 and E-100) w ere c o n d it i o n e d
under a 100# r e i n f o r c e m e n t sc h e d u le (CRP) and r e c e i v e d th e
IUCS on a l l 24 a c q u i s i t i o n t r i a l s . The o t h e r h a l f o f t h e Ss :
i ” :
! (R— 50 and E-50) were c o n d it i o n e d u n d e r a 50# r e in f o r c e m e n t
s c h e d u le (PRP) and r e c e i v e d th e UCS on a random h a l f o f
th e 24 a c q u i s i t i o n t r i a l s . No a tte m p t was made t o e q u a te
th e CRP and PRP Ss f o r h a b i t s t r e n g t h and d r i v e d u r in g a c - !
26
27
q u i s i t i o n , a p r o c e d u r e i n k e e p in g w ith p r e v i o u s l y c i t e d
GSR r e s e a r c h . I t was n o te d t h a t Humphreys C1939) fou nd no
d i f f e r e n c e i n a c q u i s i t i o n l e v e l among h i s t h r e e g r o u p s ,
e q u a te d o r n o t e q u a t e d . I t was a l s o s u g g e s te d e a r l i e r
t h a t th e u se o f a d e la y e d UCS on " n o n r e i n f o r c e d ” t r i a l s
m ig h t n o t be f e a s i b l e when t h e GSR i s th e r e s p o n s e measured,,
s i n c e Moore and Gormezano (1963) showed t h a t t h e u s u a l UCS-
o m is s io n t e c h n iq u e f o r PRF S_s d u r in g a c q u i s i t i o n l e d t o
h i g h e r l e v e l s o f c o n d i t i o n i n g and g r e a t e r r e s i s t a n c e t o
e x t i n c t i o n th a n t h e UCS-delay m ethod. They c o n c lu d e t h a t
th e d e c r e m e n ta l e f f e c t s a t t r i b u t a b l e t o n o n re in f o rc e m e n t
a lo n e may have b e e n s p u r i o u s l y o v e r e s t i m a t e d by u s in g a
l
I
UCS-delay p r o c e d u r e . They a l s o s p e c u l a t e d t h a t th e !
o b s e rv e d p e rfo rm a n c e d ecrem e n t p e rh a p s was due t o an
a s s o c i a t i v e f a c t o r o f c o n c u r r e n t c o n d i t i o n i n g i n t h e d e la y !
i n t e r v a l o f a r e s p o n s e w hich com petes w ith t h e CR i n t h e j
|
s h o r t e r CS-UCS i n t e r v a l , o r due t o t h e a d a p t a t i o n o f th e
e m o tio n a l r e s p o n s e ( r e ) as a f u n c t i o n o f UCS p r e s e n t a t i o n s .
In th e p r e s e n t s tu d y th e a c q u i s i t i o n p ro c e d u r e was
th e same f o r Group R and Group E— 24 a c q u i s i t i o n t r i a l s
w ith a CS-UCS i n t e r v a l o f 0 .5 s e c . CS and UCS d u r a t i o n s
w ere 0 .5 s e c . w ith CS o f f s e t a t th e o n s e t o f th e UCS. j
D u ring e x t i n c t i o n Group R 'h a d th e u s u a l e x t i n c t i o n t r i a l s - — ;
p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e CS o n ly , no UCS. Group E r e c e i v e d th e
UCS i n a random f a s h i o n ( i n u n i t s o f 1 - s e c . ) anyw here from ;
10 s e c s , a f t e r t h e CS t o 10 s e c s , b e f o r e th e end o f th e j
2 8
i n t e r t r i a l i n t e r v a l w hich ra n g e d from 30 t o 50 s e c s . The
d u r a t i o n o f t h e CS was t h e same as i n a c q u i s i t i o n , 0.5 s e c .
The CS-UCS p e r c e n t a g e o f p a i r i n g s a l s o re m a in e d t h e same
a s i n a c q u i s i t i o n f o r e ac h subgroup o f Group E. The
E-100 Ss r e c e i v e d th e UCS on 100$ o f th e t r i a l s ; t h e E-50
S_s r e c e i v e d t h e UCS on 50$ o f th e t r i a l s . The t e c h n iq u e
use d was a m o d i f i c a t i o n o f S p e n c e 's m eth o d s, a compromise
b etw een " M c A llis te r " t r i a l s and th e m ethod o f p r e s e n t i n g
t h e CS and UCS on a random h a l f o f t h e t r i a l s . I n th e
p r e s e n t s t u d y , CS d u r a t i o n w a sn ’t - a cue f o r e x t i n c t i o n ,
n o r was i t l i k e l y i n t h e m o d i f i c a t i o n t h a t th e GSR was
i
j
r e i n f o r c e d o r te m p o r a lly c o n d it i o n e d w ith t h e v a r i a b l e j
j
t r a c e i n t e r v a l .
. Group P, t h e c o n t r o l group f o r p s e u d o c o n d i t io n i n g ,
had random , n o n c o n tin g e n t p r e s e n t a t i o n s o f th e UCS and th e- !
CS on th e t r i a l s t h a t c o rre s p o n d e d t o th e a c q u i s i t i o n
t r i a l s f o r th e o t h e r g ro u p s . The c o n t r o l u t i l i z e d was
s i m i l a r t o th e one recommended by R e s c o r la C1967)• W h e th e r 1
th e UCS o r th e CS o c c u r r e d f i r s t on w hat would c o rr e s p o n d
t o a t r i a l was e q u a l ly l i k e l y , and th e i n t e r s t i m u l u s
i n t e r v a l ra n g e d i n a ran d o m ize d f a s h i o n ( i n 1 s e c . u n i t s )
anywhere from 10 s e c . t o 40 s e c . Group P was a l s o s u b d iv id
ed i n t o two g ro u p s . H a lf th e Ss s e r v e d as th e c o n t r o l f o r
CRF Ss and r e c e i v e d 24 CS’s and 24 UCS's u n p a ir e d ; th e
j o t h e r h a l f o f th e S_s s e r v e d as th e c o n t r o l f o r PRF Ss and
r e c e i v e d 24 CS’ s and 12 UCS’ s u n p a ir e d .
29
A p p a ra tu s
The GSR was o b t a i n e d as a DC r e s i s t a n c e change
th r o u g h 1 /2 i n . by 5 /8 i n . s i l v e r e l e c t r o d e s b e n t t o th e
c o n to u r o f th e f i r s t and t h i r d f i n g e r s o f S_’ s n o n p r e f e r r e d
h a n d . The p ick u p e l e c t r o d e s were c o n n e c te d by a W heatstone
b r i d g e i n p u t to a G rass EEG p o ly g r a p h . The p a p e r
sp e e d o f th e p o ly g ra p h was s e t a t 15 mm. p e r se c o n d . The
CS was a b l a c k l i n e d raw in g o f a c i r c l e on a w h ite b a c k
gro und and was f l a s h e d from a Kodak p r o j e c t o r i n E r s room
o n to a 8 1 /2 i n . by 11 i n . s c r e e n two f e e t i n f r o n t o f th e
3_ i n an a d j a c e n t room . The s c r e e n was s i t u a t e d on t h e one
way window s e p a r a t i n g th e two e x p e r im e n ta l room s. The
CS-UCS i n t e r v a l was 0 .5 s e c . ; th e d u r a t i o n o f th e CS
was 0 .5 s e c . w ith th e o n s e t o f t h e UCS o c c u r r i n g w ith th e
o f f s e t o f t h e CS. The UCS was a 0 .5 s e c . p u l s a t i n g DC
c u r r e n t o f 60 p u l s e s p e r s e c . p ro d u ce d by an E l e c t r o n i c
S t i m u l a t o r Model 751 (A m erican E l e c t r o n i c L a b o r a t o r i e s ,
I n c . ) . The shock was d e l i v e r e d t o th e v o l a r s u r f a c e o f
S’ s p r e f e r r e d arm by d im e - s iz e s i l v e r e l e c t r o d e s p l a c e d 2
i n . a p a r t . Shock i n t e n s i t y i n v o l t s was d e te rm in e d by a
sh o ck workup p r o c e d u r e f o r each £ 3 i n d i v i d u a l l y . S _ was t o l d
t o r e p o r t when sh o ck was f i r s t p e r c e i v e d ( I n s t r u c t i o n s #3,
Appendix A ). Then E i n c r e a s e d t h e shock g r a d u a l l y u n t i l S
E x p re s s e d d is c o m f o r t and u n w i l li n g n e s s t o p ro c e e d t o a
i n t e r v a l w ere c o n t r o l l e d by H u n te r t i m e r s . I n t e r t r i a l
CS d u r a t i o n , UCS d u r a t i o n , and th e CS-UCS
L
30
i n t e r v a l s o f 3 0 , 40, and 50 s e c . w ere m an u ally c o n t r o l l e d or.
th e b a s i s o f a preprogram m ed t a b l e o f random num bers.
P ro c e d u re
The jS was b r o u g h t i n t o a sound a t t e n u a t e d room
and s e a t e d f a c i n g th e s c r e e n . Nearby was a m icrophone
c o n n e c te d t o an a m p l i f i e r i n E ’s s e p a r a t e room. A f t e r
th e e l e c t r o d e s w ere a t t a c h e d t o S_, he r e c e i v e d a ty p e
w r i t t e n s h e e t e x p l a i n i n g th e n a tu r e o f th e GSR and s t a t i n g
t h a t th e p u rp o se o f th e e x p erim e n t was t o stu d y i n d i v i d u a l
d i f f e r e n c e s f o l lo w in g r e c e i p t of shock ( I n s t r u c t i o n s #1,
Appendix A). W hile S r e a d th e m a t e r i a l , th e GSR r e c o r d i n g
e quipm ent was c a l i b r a t e d . When th e GSR o f th e S s t a b i l i z e d ,
th e e x p e r i m e n t a l seq u en c e b e g a n . j
The e x p e r i m e n t a l sequence was as f o l l o w s : 1 |
P r e t e s t t r i a l , one p r e s e n t a t i o n o f th e CS; a Shock Workup :
i
s e r i e s fo llo w e d by 3 shock s e n s i t i z a t i o n t r i a l s a t th e |
u p p e r t h r e s h o l d o f shock ch osen by S i n o r d e r t o check
on th e m ag n itu d e and c o n s i s t e n c y o f th e UCR; 4 A d a p ta tio n j
t r i a l s , 4 p r e s e n t a t i o n s o f th e CS a lo n e ; 24 A c q u i s i t i o n
j t r i a l s ; and 16 E x t i n c t i o n t r i a l s . D uring th e a c q u i s i t i o n
t r i a l s th e 50$ PRP Ss w ere r e i n f o r c e d on a random h a l f o f
th e t r i a l s . The r a n d o m iz a tio n was done i n 4 b lo c k s
o f 6 t r i a l s eac h w ith th e f o llo w in g e x c e p ti o n s : (a) th e
f i r s t t r i a l and l a s t t r i a l o f th e a c q u i s i t i o n s e r i e s w ere
r e i n f o r c e d ; (b) th e number o f r e i n f o r c e d and n o n r e i n f o r c e d :
31
t r i a l s w ere th e same i n e a c h b lo c k o f t r i a l s ; and (c)
no more t h a n two r e i n f o r c e d o r two n o n r e i n f o r c e d t r i a l s
were p r e s e n t e d i n s u c c e s s i o n .
B e sid e s th e i n i t i a l i n s t r u c t i o n s , t h e S _
r e c e i v e d t y p e w r i t t e n i n s t r u c t i o n s b e f o r e t h e P r& te s t
t r i a l s , t h e Shock w orkup, t h e A d a p ta tio n t r i a l s , and
th e A c q u i s i t i o n t r i a l s (A ppendix A). He was a l s o t o l d
t h a t he c o u ld com m unicate w ith E by t h e m icrophone and
t h a t he was f r e e t o a sk any q u e s t io n s o r make comments
th r o u g h o u t th e e x p e r im e n t. The i n t e n t o f th e i n s t r u c t i o n s
was t o e n co u rag e S _ t o v e r b a l i z e f r e e l y . Any comments
th e S _ made d u rin g t h e c o u rs e o f th e e x p e rim e n t were
r e c o r d e d on a d a t a s h e e t . The e x p e rim e n t was fo llo w e d
by a t y p e w r i t t e n q u e s t i o n n a i r e (A ppendix B) c o n c e rn in g
S 's know ledge o f t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s .
CHAPTER V
RESULTS
GSR M agnitude
The m ag n itu d e o f t h e g a l v a n i c s k i n re s p o n s e
(GSR) d u r i n g e x t i n c t i o n was th e p r i n c i p a l d e p e n d e n t v a r
i a b l e i n th e p r e s e n t e x p e r im e n t. GSR changes i n r e s i s t
ance o f 100 ohms o r more w i t h a l a t e n c y o f 1 t o 5 s e c .
from CS o n s e t w ere m e a su re d . The maximum change i n r e
s i s t a n c e d u r in g th e tim e i n t e r v a l was d e f i n e d as th e
r e s p o n s e , w ith re s p o n s e o n s e t s e r v i n g as t h e r e f e r e n c e
p o i n t f o r t h e b a s e r e s i s t a n c e . B e fo re any s t a t i s t i c a l
t e s t s w ere em ployed, th e o r i g i n a l r e s i s t a n c e d a t a were
tr a n s f o r m e d i n t o th e u n i t s q u a re r o o t o f c o n d u c ta n c e
c h an g e . The t r a n s f o r m a t i o n te n d s t o n o r m a liz e p o s i t i v e l y
skewed r e s i s t a n c e d a t a . The b a s e r e s i s t a n c e a t re s p o n s e
o n s e t and t h e b a s e r e s i s t a n c e a t maximum change were con
v e r t e d t o c o n d u c ta n c e u n i t s by m u l t i p l y i n g t h e i r r e c i p
r o c a l s by 1 ,000 ,000 .. Base c o n d u c ta n c e a t r e s p o n s e o n s e t
!was th e n s u b t r a c t e d from t h e b a s e c o n d u c ta n c e a t th e
p o i n t o f maximum ch an g e , and th e s q u a re .ro o t o f th e d i f f
e re n c e o b t a i n e d . The t r a n s f o r m a t i o n s we"?e'done on a
32
33
H oneyw ell 800 c o m p u te r .1
A n a ly ses o f th e GSR m ag n itu d e d a t a w ere d i r e c t e d
t o a n sw e rin g t h r e e q u e s t i o n s : *
1 . Did c o n d i t i o n i n g o c c u r i n Group R and
Group E?
2 . Was t h e r e a p a r t i a l r e i n f o r c e m e n t e f f e c t
(PRE) i n Group R?
3. Did th e e x p e r im e n ta l m a n ip u la tio n s i n ex
t i n c t i o n p r e v e n t o r d e t e r th e o c c u r r e n c e o f a PRE i n
Group E?
T a b le s 1 and 2 (A ppendix C) summarize th e mean
GSR m ag n itu d e and th e v a r i a n c e o f th e g r o u p s , r e s p e c t i v e l y ,
d u r i n g th e 16 e x t i n c t i o n t r i a l s , and p r e s e n t th e d a ta
on w hich s u b s e q u e n t s t a t i s t i c a l t e s t s w ere b a s e d .
E q u a l i t y o f g r o u p s . The mean GSR m ag n itu d e o f
t h e s i x su b g ro u p s o f Ss (R -5 0, R -100, E -5 0 , E -1 0 0 , P -5 0 ,
and P-100) was exam ined b e f o r e any a n a ly s e s o f t h e con
d i t i o n i n g d a t a w ere made. An a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e
(H ay es, 1963* P* 370) was computed i n o r d e r t o t e s t th e
p r e s u p p o s i t i o n t h a t t h e gro u p s were e q u i v a l e n t i n r e s -
p o n s i v i t y b e f o r e any d i f f e r e n t i a l e x p e r im e n ta l c o n d i t i o n s
w ere im posed upon them d u r in g a c q u i s i t i o n and e x t i n c t i o n .
—
i 'T he a u th o r th a n k s t h e USC Computer S c ie n c e
L a b o r a to r y f o r f r e e u se o f com puter tim e and Mrs. Ann
S c h e l l f o r h e lp w ith program m ing.
34
T a b le 3 (A ppendix C) sum m arizes th e f i n d i n g s . T here w ere
no • s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e among th e s i x .groups ( F < 1 ,
d f = 5 / 6 6 ) ; th u s th e a s s u m p tio n t h a t t h e v a r i o u s sub g ro u p s
w ere random sam ples from th e same p o p u l a t i o n was s u p p o r t e d .
B ecause o f t h e h ig h i n t e r - s u b j e c t v a r i a b i l i t y o f t e n en
c o u n te r e d i n GSR e x p e r i m e n t a t i o n , th e F t e s t (H ayes, 1963,
p . 349) was a l s o em ployed t o t e s t f o r any s i g n i f i c a n t
d i f f e r e n c e s among v a r i a n c e s o f th e s i x su b g ro u p s . 'The
l a r g e s t d i f f e r e n c e i n v a r i a n c e s was betw een t h e E-100
and t h e P-100 g r o u p s . The o b t a i n e d v a lu e o f F (F = I . 7 8 ,
d f = 1 1 /1 1 ) was n o t s i g n i f i c a n t . The mean GSR m ag n itu d e
f o r a l l s i x g ro u p s com bined on th e a d a p t a t i o n t r i a l was
0 .5 5 .
C o n d itio n in g o f t h e GSR. The c r i t e r i o n f o r
c o n d i t i o n i n g i n t h e p r e s e n t e x p e rim e n t was th e d e m o n s tr a t
io n o f a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n mean m ag n itu d e betw een
t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l Ss (R -5 0 , R -100, E -5 0 , E-100) and th e
c o n t r o l Ss (P -5 0 , P-100) on th e t e s t t r i a l , th e f i r s t
e x t i n c t i o n t r i a l . The h y p o t h e s i s was t h a t th e mean mag-
n i t u d e o f t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l grou ps was g r e a t e r t h a n th e
mean m ag n itu d e o f t h e c o n t r o l g ro u p s .
An a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e was p e rfo rm e d on th e
f i r s t e x t i n c t i o n t r i a l d a t a f o r a l l S s, and i t s summary
i s p r e s e n t e d i n T a b le A (A ppendix C). T here was a h i g h ly
35
s i g n i f i c a n t Groups e f f e c t (F = 1 1 .2 5 , d f = 5 /6 6 , , < . 0 1 ) .
A se co n d a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e was computed com paring o nly
th e f o u r e x p e r im e n ta l gro u p s on t h e f i r s t e x t i n c t i o n
t r i a l i n d r d e r t o t e s t w h e th e r t h e group s d i f f e r e d
s i g n i f i c a n t l y i n a c q u i s i t i o n l e v e l . T ab le 5 (A ppendix C)
shows t h e r e s u l t s o f t h e a n a l y s i s . The o b ta in e d F r a t i o
( d f = 3/44) was l e s s t h a n u n i t y , i n d i c a t i n g t h a t th e f o u r
gro u p s were r e s p o n d in g a t a s i m i l a r l e v e l on th e f i r s t
e x t i n c t i o n t r i a l . The r e s u l t f u r t h e r i n d i c a t e d t h a t
t h e Groups e f f e c t o b t a i n e d i n t h e f i r s t a n a l y s i s of
v a r i a n c e was n o t due t o e x p e r im e n ta l group d i f f e r e n c e s .
I n d i v i d u a l t_ t e s t s ( d f = 22) w ere p e rfo rm ed
com paring t h e v a r i o u s e x p e r im e n ta l groups w ith t h e ap
p r o p r i a t e p s e u d o c o n d i t io n i n g group (50$ o r 100$) t o
c o m p lete t h e d e m o n s tr a tio n o f d o n d i t i o n i n g . T ab le 6
(A ppendix C) p r e s e n t s a summary o f th e f i n d in g s from t h e |
f o u r t_ t e s t s . I n a l l f o u r c o m p ariso n s th e d i f f e r e n c e
b etw een th e e x p e r im e n ta l and pseudo mean GSR m ag n itu d es i
was s i g n i f i c a n t beyond th e .001 l e v e l . T h e r e f o r e , a
h ig h d e g re e o f c o n fid e n c e can be p la c e d i n th e c o n c lu s io n 1
j t h a t c o n d i t i o n i n g d id o c c u r i n th e R -50, R -100, E -5 0 , and
E-100 Ss and t h a t t h a t c o n d i t i o n i n g was o f a s i m i l a r l e v e l . |
The PRE i n th e R e g u la r Group ( R -50 , R -1 00).
F ig u re 1 shows t h e mean GSR m agnitud e o f th e R-50 and
R-100 gro u p s p l o t t e d a s a f u n c t i o n o f th e 16 e x t i n c t i o n
Mean G S R M agnitude
!
R-50
R-100
1 .7 5
1 .5 5
1.3 5
15
4
6 7 12 13 14 15 16 8 2 1
5 9 10 3
1 1
E x t i n c t i o n T r i a l s
P ig . 1 Mean GSR m ag n itu d e o f R-50 and R-100 Ss d u r in g e x t i n c t i o n .
t r i a l s . A f t e r t h e f i r s t e x t i n c t i o n t r i a l on w hich t h e
two gro u p s w ere e q u i v a l e n t i n m a g n itu d e , t h e c u rv e f o r
R-100 Ss d ro p s s h a r p l y , th e n c o n ti n u e s i t s downward t r e n d
th r o u g h o u t th e c o u rs e o f e x t i n c t i o n . The mean d i f f e r e n c e
i n m ag n itu d e b e tw ee n t r i a l 1 and t r i a l 2 was c a l c u l a t e d
f o r th e R-100 grou p by t_ t e s t f o r c o r r e l a t e d m e a s u re s .
The mean d i f f e r e n c e was h i g h ly s i g n i f i c a n t (t_, o n e - t a i l e d =
3 ,5 0 , d f = 11, J 3 ^ . 0 0 5 ) j a f i n d i n g w hich shows th e v e ry
s u b s t a n t i a l d ro p i n r e s p o n d in g a f t e r one t r i a l o f n o n r e i n
fo r c e m e n t. I n c o n t r a s t , t h e R-50 group c u rv e shows v e ry
l i t t l e d e crem e n t o v e r th e 1 6 e x t i n c t i o n t r i a l s . F ig u r e
2 i s a s i m p l i f i e d v e rs o n o f Fig., 1 and p r e s e n t s a c l e a r e r
p i c t u r e o f th e c o u rs e o f e x t i n c t i o n f o r g ro ups R-50 and
R -100. The a b s c i s s a i n F i g . 2 r e p r e s e n t s t h r e e b lo c k s o f j
f i v e e x t i n c t i o n t r i a l s each r a t h e r t h a n i n d i v i d u a l t r i a l s . j
I t can be s e e n t h a t t h e R-50 group shows l i t t l e change i n
mean m ag n itu d e from t r i a l s 2 t o 16 w h ile t h e R-100 group
shows a r e g u l a r d e c l i n e o v e r th e same t r i a l s .
An a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e (Edw ards, 1963* p . 227)
was c a r r i e d o u t o v e r t r i a l s 2-16 and i s sum m arized i n !
T ab le 7 (A ppendix C). The t r e a t m e n t e f f e c t , R e in fo rc e m e n t
1(100 v s . 5 0 ), was s i g n i f i c a n t (p _ < .0 5 ) w ith an F o f 5 ^ 0
( d f = 1 / 2 2 ) . T h e r e f o r e i t can be c o n c lu d e d t h a t th e a c
q u i s i t i o n t r a i n i n g had a d i f f e r e n t i a l e f f e c t on r e s i s t a n c e
t o e x t i n c t i o n . F or th e t r i a l s e f f e c t th e o b t a i n e d F o f '
38
R-50 • — •
R-100 0— 0
1 .7 5
1.55
1.3 5
I
I
I
I
j
i
T r i a l s
7 - H
T r i a l s
2-6
B locks o f E x t i n c t i o n T r i a l s
j P i g . 2. Mean GSR m agn itu de o f R-50 and R-100 Ss
|d u rin g e x t i n c t i o n i n s u c c e s s i v e b lo c k s o f f i v e t r i a l s .
39
1 .4 0 ( d f = 1 4 /3 0 8 ) m is se d b e in g s i g n i f i c a n t ( p < T .1 0 ),
an i n d i c a t i o n t h a t t h e 15 t r i a l means a v e ra g e d o v e r th e
two g ro u p s do n o t d i f f e r * The n o n s i g n i f i c a n c e o f t h e t r i a l s
e f f e c t can be e x p la in e d p a r t i a l l y by t h e l a r g e drop i n
mean m ag n itu d e o f t h e R-100 Ss from t r i a l 1 t o t r i a l 2,
and t h a t g r o u p ’ s s lo w e r r a t e o f e x t i n c t i o n from t r i a l 2
t o t r i a l 16* The r e i n f o r c e m e n t by t r i a l s i n t e r a c t i o n mean
s q u a r e was a l s o n o n s i g n i f i c a n t ( P < 1 , d f = 1 4 /3 0 8 ) . The
• 1
l a t t e r f i n d i n g i s i n t e r p r e t e d t o mean t h a t t h e e x t i n c t i o n
c u rv e s o f th e two g ro u p s were b a s i c a l l y o f th e same form .
I n o r d e r t o r e f i n e f u r t h e r th e co m p a riso n o f th e
two g ro u p s i n e x t i n c t i o n t h r e e more a n a l y s e s o f v a r i a n c e
w ere com puted— one f o r t h e d a ta o f t r i a l s 2 - 6 , one f o r j
i
t r i a l s 7 -1 1 , and t h e l a s t f o r t r i a l s 1 2 -1 6 . T a b le s 8, 9>
i
and 10 r e s p e c t i v e l y (A ppendix C) c o n t a i n sum m aries o f th e
a n a l y s e s .
The f i r s t a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e ( T r i a l s 2-6)
r e v e a l s t h a t th e R e in fo rc e m e n t e f f e c t betw een grou ps
s
R-50 and R-100 i s n o t s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t (F = 2 .0 9 ,
d f = 1 / 2 2 ) , a t th e b e g in n in g o f e x t i n c t i o n (T a b le 8,
i1 - r_1
I
jAppendix C ). Thus on t h e f i r s t b lo c k o f f i v e t r i a l s th e
jo v e r a ll p e rfo rm a n c e o f t h e Ss i s e v i d e n t l y s i m i l a r .
j ;
'E xam ination o f P ig . 1 shows t h a t on t r i a l s 4 and 5 th e
jR -1 0 0 had r e l a t i v e l y h ig h GSR mean m ag n itu d e as compared
jto .t h e mean m ag n itu d e on e a r l i e r and l a t e r t r i a l s .
40
However, th e T r i a l s e f f e c t was h i g h ly s i g n i f i c a n t
(F = 3 .6 0 , d f = 4 /8 8 , £ = . 0 1 ) , ah i n d i c a t i o n t h a t
e x t i n c t i o n — re d u c e d l e v e l o f r e s p o n d in g — was o c c u r r i n g .
The i n t e r a c t i o n , R e in fo rc e m e n t X T r i a l s , was n o n s i g n i f i c a n t
( K 1, d f = 4 / 8 8 ) . I n f a c t , th e F v a lu e o f l e s s th a n j
u n i t y was found i n a l l th e t e s t s f o r an i n t e r a c t i o n e f f e c t
when th e R-50 and R-100 g ro u p s were com pared. F ig u r e 1
i n d i c a t e s th e p r o b a b l e r e a s o n f o r th e c o n s i s t e n t non
s i g n i f i c a n t i n t e r a c t i o n e f f e c t . The v a r i a b i l i t y , d e f i n e d
by t h e change i n l e v e l o f r e s p o n d in g from t r i a l t o t r i a l
w i t h i n a g ro u p , a p p e a rs to o c c u r i n a l i k e m anner f o r
b o th g ro u p s . F o r exam ple, on a t r i a l on w hich th e R-50
group was r e s p o n d in g a t a h i g h e r l e v e l t h a n th e p r e c e d in g j
i
t r i a l , the- R-100 grou p a l s o showed an i n c r e a s e i n r e s p o n - i
s i v i t y r e l a t i v e to t h e p r e v io u s t r i a l . ;
When t h e d a t a of t r i a l s 7-11 w ere a n a ly z e d ;
(T ab le 9, Appendix C ), a d i f f e r e n t p i c t u r e o f t h e c o u rs e
o f e x t i n c t i o n em erged. At t h i s p o i n t i n th e a n a l y s i s th e
R e in fo rc e m e n t e f f e c t becomes s i g n i f i c a n t a t l e s s th a n th e
.05 l e v e l (F = 5 .1 3 , d f = 1 / 2 2 ) , b u t t h e T r i a l s e f f e c t
1
iis n o t (F = 1 .7 0 , d f = 4 / 8 8 ) . On th e a v e r a g e , t h e n ,
1 — '
j e x t i n c t i o n to o k p l a c e a t a slo w e r r a t e on t r i a l s 7-11
th a n on th e f i r s t b lo c k o f t r i a l s .
When t r i a l s 12-16 were c o n s id e r e d (T ab le 10,
Appendix C), i t was found by th e a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e
t h a t t h e R e in fo rc e m e n t e f f e c t was h i g h l y s i g n i f i c a n t
w ith a p r o b a b i l i t y l e v e l o f l e s s t h a n *01 (F = 21*64,
d f = 1 / 2 2 ) . F or th e T r i a l s e f f e c t F -was l e s s t h a n 1 , an
i n d i c a t i o n a g a i n o f a slo w in g down o f t h e d e crem en t i n
th e c o n d i t i o n e d GSR.
Next a s e r i e s o f t_ t e s t s ( d f = 22) w ere p e rfo rm e d
t o i s o l a t e s p e c i f i c a l l y th e p a r t i c u l a r t r i a l s on w hich
s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s i n GSR m ag n itu d e o c c u r r e d b etw een
t h e R-50 and R-100 g r o u p s . The d i r e c t i o n a l h y p o t h e s is
f o r a l l th e t_ t e s t s was t h a t th e mean GSR m ag n itu d e o f
th e R-50 g ro up w ould be g r e a t e r t h a n th e mean GSR m ag n itu d e
o f th e R-100 g ro u p . T ab le 11 (A ppendix C) p r e s e n t s th e
f i n d i n g s from th e 15 t_ t e s t s c o v e r in g t r i a l s 2 - 1 6 . I t
w i l l be n o te d t h a t w h ile i n t h e f i r s t f i v e - t r i a l b lo c k
o n ly two s i g n i f i c a n t t_ v a lu e s ( ^ 4 . 0 5 ) o c c u r r e d , i n th e
seco n d f i v e - t r i a l b lo c k f o u r o f th e f i v e t_ v a lu e s r e a c h e d
s i g n i f i c a n c e . The d i f f e r e n c e betw een t h e two mean GSR
m ag n itu d es was s i g n i f i c a n t a t l e s s t h a n -0.02 5 on t r i a l s
8, 9 a 10, and 1 1 . Only on t r i a l 7 was th e d i f f e r e n c e
b e tw ee n th e two groups* a v e ra g e r e s p o n s e s n o n s i g n i f i c a n t .
j
On t h e l a s t b lo c k o f t r i a l s , t r i a l s 1 2 -1 6 , a l l d i f f e r e n c e s
betw een th e two g r o u p s ’ mean m ag n itu d e were s i g n i f i c a n t .
The p r o b a b i l i t y o f t h e t_ v a lu e s m easu res a r e as f o l l o w s :
j t r i a l 12, p < .0 2 5 ; t r i a l 13# P *05; t r i a l 14, p < .0 5 ;
j t r i a l 15, p .0 2 5 ; and t r i a l 1 6 , p ^ . 0 5 .
"42
I n c o n c l u s i o n , a summary o f th e f i n d i n g s from
th e f o u r a n a ly s e s of v a r i a n c e and th e 15 t_ t e s t s i s :
1 . The R-50 and R-100 g ro ups re s p o n d e d a t a
s i m i l a r l e v e l on e x t i n c t i o n t r i a l 1 b u t showed s t e a d i l y
i n c r e a s i n g d i f f e r e n c e s i n mean m ag n itu d e from t r i a l 2
th r o u g h t r i a l 16 as shown by th e r e s u l t s o f th e t_ t e s t s
and o f th e a n a l y s e s o f th e b lo c k s o f 5 t r i a l s . The
R-100 Ss c o n s i s t e n t l y re s p o n d e d a t a s i g n i f i c a n t l y lo w er
l e v e l from t r i a l 8 th ro u g h t r i a l 1 6 .
♦
2. E x t i n c t i o n was d e m o n s tr a te d w ith m ost o f
i t o c c u r r i n g i n t h e f i r s t b lo c k o f t r i a l s .
3. The t r e n d o f e x t i n c t i o n f o r t h e two groups
was b a s i c a l l y o f th e same form .
On t h e b a s i s o f th e s t a t i s t i c a l t e s t s p e rfo rm e d
i t can be c o n c lu d e d t h a t a PRE was shown when t h e R-50
and R-100 Ss w ere c o n s i d e r e d .
The PRE i n th e E q u a liz e d Group (E - 5 0 , E -1 0 0 ) .
F ig u re 3 p r e s e n t s th e mean m ag n itu d e o f t h e PRF and CRF
S_s who had sh o ck i n s e r t e d d u r i n g e x t i n c t i o n t r i a l s .
A lth o u g h t h e r e i s v a r i a b i l i t y from t r i a l t o t r i a l , i t
i
|a p p e a r s t h a t b o th group s e x t i n g u i s h e d a t a s i m i l a r r a t e .
A s i z e a b l e d rop i n mean m ag n itu d e t a k e s p l a c e i n b o th
!gro u p s d u r in g th e f i r s t few t r i a l s . When th e mean
d i f f e r e n c e i n m ag n itu d e b etw een t r i a l 1 and t r i a l 2 was
j c a l c u l a t e d f o r th e E-100 and E-50 S s , th e E-100 group
Mean G SR Magnitude ( y r c )
E-50 # — #
E-100 O— O
1 .7 5 -
1 .5 5
1 .3 5
1.15
.95
JO
/ \
* * \
i
6 2
8
1
13 14 15 16 3 5 7 9
10 12 11
E x t i n c t i o n T r i a l s
P ig . 3. Mean GSR m ag n itu d e o f E-50 and E-100 S_s d u r in g e x t i n c t i o n
-tr
U >
t
\
44
showed a s i g n i f i c a n t d ecrem en t i n r e s p o n d in g (t_ = 1 .9 4 ,
d f = 11, 0 5 ); th e E-50 g r o u p ’s d e c l i n e i n mean magnitude;
was s l i g h t l y l e s s (ib = 1 . 30, d f = 11 , £ = , 0 6 ).
An a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e (E dw ards, 1963, p . 227)
o f t r i a l s 2-16 s u p p o r t s th e g r a p h i c a l e v id e n c e . T ab le 12
(A ppendix C) sum m arizes th e f i n d i n g s . The R e in fo rc e m e n t
e f f e c t was n o t s i g n i f i c a n t ( P ^ .1 , d £ = 1 / 2 2 ) , a s t r o n g
i n d i c a t i o n t h a t t h e two g ro ups e x t i n g u i s h e d a t a s i m i l a r
l e v e l . I n o t h e r w o rd s, no PRE was d e m o n s tr a te d . The
h i g h l y s i g n i f i c a n t T r i a l s e f f e c t (F = 2 .1 9 , d f = 1 4 /3 0 8 ,
£ = . 0 1 ) , and n o n s i g n i f i c a n t R e in fo rc e m e n t X T r i a l s
i n t e r a c t i o n show t h a t e x t i n c t i o n o c c u r r e d , b u t t h e group s
d i d n o t d i f f e r i n t h e i r r a t e s o f e x t i n c t i o n when a l l 15
t r i a l s a r e c o n s i d e r e d . j
The d a t a o f th e E-50 and E-100 Ss w ere s u b j e c t e d
t o t h r e e a d d i t i o n a l a n a l y s e s o f v a r i a n c e s ; one c o v e r in g
e x t i n c t i o n t r i a l s 2 -6 , t h e seco n d f o r t r i a l s 7 -1 1 , and
th e l a s t f o r t r i a l s 1 2 -1 6 , T a b le s 13, 14, and 15,
r e s p e c t i v e l y , (A ppendix C) p r e s e n t t h e f i n d i n g s .
On th e f i r s t b lo c k o f t r i a l s none o f th e e f f e c t s
w ere s i g n i f i c a n t . Both th e R e in fo rc e m e n t e f f e c t and
R e in fo rc e m e n t X T r i a l s i n t e r a c t i o n showed F v a lu e s o f l e s s
t h a n u n ity * The T r i a l s e f f e c t a l s o m isse d r e a c h i n g s i g n i - i
i f in c a n c e w ith a p r o b a b i l i t y l e v e l o f a b o u t .1 0 . I t i s
| l i k e l y t h a t th e s h i f t i n r e s p o n s i v i t y o f t h e E-50 Ss
45
from t r i a l 3 t o t r i a l 4 ( P i g . 3) b lo c k e d o u t th e e x t i n c t i o n
e f f e c t .
I n th e se co n d b lo c k o f f i v e t r i a l s ( t r i a l s 7 -1 1 )
a l l o f th e e f f e c t s w ere n o n s i g n i f i c a n t ( F < 1 ) . However,
th e a n a l y s i s o f th e l a s t f i v e t r i a l s r e v e a l e d t h a t
a lt h o u g h th e R e in fo rc e m e n t and T r i a l s e f f e c t s rem a in e d
n o n s i g n i f i c a n t , th e R e in fo rc e m e n t X T r i a l s e f f e c t d id
r e a c h s i g n i f i c a n c e (F = 3 .1 2 , d f = 4 /8 8 , £ < f .0 5 ) »
A p p a r e n tly , d u r in g th e l a t t e r p a r t o f th e e x p e rim e n t th e
CRP and PRP Ss d i f f e r e d i n t h e i r r a t e s o f e x t i n c t i o n .
F ig u r e 4 p r e s e n t s th e d a ta i n a'jnore s i m p l i f i e d form .
Each p o i n t on t h e g ra p h r e p r e s e n t s th e mean m ag n itu d e o f
each gro up f o r f i v e t r i a l s combined r a t h e r th a n t r i a l by
t r i a l mean m a g n itu d e . Here i t can be se e n t h a t th e
s lo p e o f th e e x t i n c t i o n c u rv e from t h e second b lo c k o f
t r i a l s t o th e t h i r d b lo c k i s s t e e p e r f o r th e E-50 group
th a n f o r th e E-100 g ro u p . The r e s u l t s can be i n t e r p r e t e d
as a t r e n d to w a rd a r e v e r s e d PRE, s i n c e th e PRP Ss a p p e a r
t o be e x t i n g u i s h i n g a t a f a s t e r r a t e t h a n th e CRP S s .
I n summary, t h r e e c o n c l u s i o n s can be drawn from th e f o u r
a n a l y s e s o f v a r i a n c e .
1 . The PRE was n o t d e m o n s tra te d when t h e E-50
and E-100 g ro u p s a r e com pared. None o f th e t e s t s showed
a s i g n i f i c a n t R e in fo rc e m e n t e f f e c t ,
2, When th e d a t a o f th e 15 e x t i n c t i o n t r i a l s a r e
E-50 • ---•
E-100 O-- O
1 .5 5
1 .3 5
•1.15
cx
—o
-p
Trials
12-16 ■
Trials
2-6
T r i a l s
7-11
B lo ck s o f E x t i n c t i o n T r i a l s
P i g . 4. Mean GSR m ag n itu d e o f E-50 and E-100 S_s
d u r in g e x t i n c t i o n in s u c c e s s i v e b lo c k s o f f i v e t r i a l s
47
com bined, e x t i n c t i o n e f f e c t s become evideni?.
3* I n th e l a s t t h i r d o f th e t r i a l s th e r a t e s
o f e x t i n c t i o n d i f f e r e d f o r th e two g ro u p s , w ith th e E-50
Ss e x t i n g u i s h i n g f a s t e r .
When th e h y p o t h e s i s was f o r m u la te d and s p e c i f i c
p r e d i c t i o n s made, i t was im p lie d t h a t th e i n s e r t i o n o f
shock d u r in g e x t i n c t i o n f o r th e E -gro up w ould n o t o n ly
a f f e c t th e PRE, b u t p r o b a b ly would r a i s e t h e l e v e l o f
r e s p o n d in g o f th e E group c l o s e r t o t h e l e v e l o f th e
r e g u l a r PRP S s . F ig u r e s 5 and 6 d e p i c t t h e r e s p o n s e s o f
th e S_s s R -50, R -100, E -5 0 , and E -100 . F ig u r e 5 r e p r e s e n t s
th e t r i a l by t r i a l mean m ag n itu d e o f each g ro u p ; and
I
F i g . 6 shows th e mean m ag n itu d e p l o t t e d i n t h r e e b lo c k s o f j
f i v e t r i a l s e a c h . An e x a m in a tio n o f th e two g rap h s r e v e a l s |
t h a t th e E-50 and E-100 Ss were r e s p o n d in g a t a l e v e l j
s i m i l a r to t h e R-100 Ss* T here seems t o be somewhat l e s s j
t r i a l by t r i a l v a r i a b i l i t y i n th e R-100 Ss tow ard th e
l a t t e r p a r t o f e x t i n c t i o n ; o th e r w is e th e t h r e e gro u p s a re
q u i t e a l i k e . To s u b s t a n t i a t e t h e g r a p h i c a l e v id e n c e an
a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e o f t h e t h r e e g r o u p s 1 d a ta was p e r
form ed, o v e r t r i a l s 2 -1 6 . The summary o f t h e a n a l y s i s (Table!
16, Appendix C) s t r o n g l y s u p p o r ts th e a s s u m p tio n o f
e q u a l i t y o f th e t h r e e g ro u p s th ro u g h o u t e x t i n c t i o n . The
R e in fo rc em en t e f f e c t was n o t s i g n i f i c a n t ( F < 1 , d f = 2 / 3 3 ) , *
a f a c t w hich d e m o n s tr a te s no d i f f e r e n t i a l re s p o n d in g
M ean M agnitude
R-50
R-100 o—o
E-50
E-100 O— O
1 .7 5
1 .5 5
1 .1 5
X
10 11 12
16
E x t i n c t i o n T r i a l s
CO
F ig . 5. Mean GSR m agn itu de o f R -50, R-100, E -5 0 , and E-100 Ss
d u r in g e x t i n c t i o n . ~
49
R-50 • -----•
R-100
O
o
E-50
• — •
E-100
o — o
1 .7 5
1 .5 5
'1.35
O
T r i a l s
11-16 :
T r i a l s
7-11
T r i a l s
2-6
I
i
B locks o f E x t i n c t i o n T r i a l s
| P i g . 6. Mean GSR m ag n itu d e o f R -50, R -100, E -5 0 , and ;
jE-100 Ss d u r i n g e x t i n c t i o n i n s u c c e s s i v e b lo c k s o f f i v e
t r i a l s .
I
50
among t h e R -100, E -5 0 , and E-100 S s . The t r i a l s e f f e c t
was v e ry s i g n i f i c a n t (F = 4 .2 2 , d f = 1 4 /4 6 2 , g_ . < . 0 1 ) ;
b u t t h e R e in fo rc e m e n t X T r i a l s i n t e r a c t i o n was n o t ( F ^ l ) .
The l a t t e r f i n d i n g s a r e i n t e r p r e t e d t o mean t h a t e x t i n c t i o n
d i d o c c u r , b u t th e r a t e s o f e x t i n c t i o n o v e r t r i a l s 2-16
were s i m i l a r . I t seems q u i t e c o n c lu s iv e t h a t E-50 and
E-100 g ro u p s p e rfo rm e d a t t h e l e v e l o f th e R-100 g ro u p .
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e
T ab le 17 (A ppendix C) p r e s e n t s i n summary form
t h e S_s’ answ ers t o t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e . A lth oug h th e
w r i t t e n r e s p o n s e s w ere e x p e c te d t o p r o v id e a d d i t i o n a l
i n f o r m a t i o n on group d i f f e r e n c e s , th e q u e s t i o n n a i r e p ro v e d
j
i
q u i t e i n s e n s i t i v e a s a m easure o f d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n . I t i s I
s e e n t h a t a l l s i x g ro u p s s u b j e c t i v e l y e v a l u a t e d th e sh o ck j
a b o u t t h e same. A r a t h e r s u r p r i s i n g r e s u l t was th e a n s - .
wer t o q u e s t i o n 3, .how o f t e n th e S th o u g h t he was sh o c k e d .
Very few Ss ju d g e d t h e fre q u e n c y o f sh o c k r e c e i v e d c o r r e c t
l y ; o n ly two Ss o f t h e E-100 group t h a t was shocked on
e v e ry t r i a l th r o u g h o u t th e e x p erim e n t a n sw e re d , "100% .”
i
|There a l s o seemed t o be a ten d e n cy ( q u e s t i o n 5) f o r t h e
IR-50 g ro up t o have a g r e a t e r e x p e c t a t i o n o f shock th a n
I
i
!the E-50 g ro u p . H a lf o f t h e Ss i n t h e fo rm er group a n s w e r -!
| i
led n o , when a sk e d i f th e y were e v e r sh o cked when th e y d id
jn o t e x p e c t i t ; none o f th e Ss i n th e l a t t e r group answ ered
ino t o th e same q u e s t i o n . The answ ers t o q u e s t i o n s 7 and 8 '
51
can be i n t e r p r e t e d p e rh a p s t h a t most Ss r e c o g n iz e d th e
change from a c q u i s i t i o n t o e x t i n c t i o n . T here was a
p re p o n d e re n c e o f yes answ ers g iv e n by a l l Ss t o q u e s t i o n 7*
"where were you n o t shocked when you e x p e c te d ." L ik e w is e ,
m ost o f th e Ss s t i p u l a t e d " m id d le " , o r " l a s t p a r t " when
a sk e d i n w hat p a r t o f th e e x p e rim e n t th e e v e n t o c c u r r e d .
Q u e s tio n in g o f t h e Ss r e v e a l e d t h a t most i d e n t i f y t h e
te rm s "m id d le " and "end" as m eaning th e same t h i n g — th e
p o i n t o f t r a n s i t i o n from a c q u i s i t i o n t o e x t i n c t i o n t r i a l s .
I n t h e i n s t r u c t i o n s t h e Ss w ere en co u rag ed t o
v e r b a l i z e th r o u g h o u t th e e x p e r im e n t. S e v e r a l p a t t e r n s ,
s p e c i f i c t o a g ro u p , seemed t o em erge. Many o f th e
p s e u d o c o n d i t io n i n g Ss a f t e r f i v e o r s i x " a c q u i s i t i o n "
t r i a l s s a i d , "Why, t h e r e i s no r e l a t i o n s h i p ; " o r , " i t ’ s
ran d o m ." At t h a t p o i n t t h e i r GSR’ s to th e CS showed a
m arked d e c re m e n t. None o f th e R-100 gave any v e r b a l i z a t
i o n s , b u t s e v e r a l Ss showed i n c r e a s i n g r e s t l e s s n e s s as
t h e e x p e rim e n t p r o g r e s s e d . I n c o n t r a s t th e E-100 grou p
commented w ith g r e a t e r f r e q u e n c y , many o f th e Ss com
p l a i n i n g o f th e shock l e v e l i n e x t i n c t i o n . The s u p p o s i t i o n
I t h a t t h e R-50 S_s had a r e l a t i v e l y h ig h e x p e c t a t i o n o f shock
jseems t o be s u p p o r te d by t h e i r v o l u n te e r e d comments. F iv e
jof th e Ss s a i d t h a t th e y k e p t e x p e c ti n g shock th r o u g h o u t;
jin f a c t , two even s a i d th e y "m isse d " t h e shocks o r were
j
j d is a p p o in te d when th e shock d i d n ’t o c c u r . The E-50 group
■ 52
t a l k e d l e s s ; t y p i c a l comments were* "T here seem t o be
t h r e e o r f o u r p a t t e r n s o f s h o c k ," o r "The shock i s o c c u r
r i n g i n random g ro u p s o f tw o ."
CHAPTER' VI'
DISCUSSION
When t h e g e n e r a l h y p o t h e s i s o f t h e e x p e rim e n t was
p r e s e n t e d e a r l i e r , t h r e e s p e c i f i c p r e d i c t i o n s from t h a t
h y p o t h e s i s w ere f o r m u la te d . The f o l lo w in g d i s c u s s i o n o f
t h e r e s u l t s and th e accom panying i m p l i c a t i o n s a r e o r g a n iz e d
i n te rm s o f t h e s p e c i f i c p r e d i c t i o n s .
P r e d i c t i o n 1. I t was p r e d i c t e d t h a t a PRE would
be d e m o n s tra te d b etw een t h e R-50 and R-100 S s . A n a ly ses o f
t h e d a t a s t r o n g l y s u p p o r te d th e p r e d i c t i o n and__confirmed
co m p arab le e y e l i d c o n d i t i o n i n g work ( i . e . , R e y n o ld s, 1958)
and GSR c o n d i t i o n i n g r e s e a r c h ( i . e . , Humphreys, 1 9 4 0 ).
Over t h e 16 e x t i n c t i o n t r i a l s th e PRP group e x t i n g u i s h e d
v e ry l i t t l e ; i n c o n t r a s t , th e mean m agnitud e o f t h e CRP
group d ro p p ed t o i t s a d a p t a t i o n l e v e l i n t h e l a s t b lo c k o f
f i v e t r i a l s . A lso th e r a t e o f r e s p o n s e d e crem en t o f th e
CRP Ss c o rre s p o n d e d c l o s e l y t o co m p arable d a t a o f p r e c e d
in g e x p e r i m e n t a t i o n . As J e n k in s and S t a n le y (1950) p h ra s e d
i t i n t h e i r re v ie w o f p a r t i a l r e i n f o r c e m e n t l i t e r a t u r e ,
" A ll o t h e r t h i n g s e q u a l , r e s i s t a n c e t o e x t i n c t i o n a f t e r
j p a r t i a l r e i n f o r c e m e n t i s g r e a t e r t h a n a f t e r c o n tin u o u s
r e i n f o r c e m e n t when b e h a v i o r s t r e n g t h i s m easured i n term s
53
5H
o f s i n g l e r e s p o n s e s " (p . 222) .
Spence ( 1966a) h y p o t h e s iz e d t h a t th e r e a s o n f o r
th e r a p i d d e c l i n e i n CR’ s o f t h e 100$ Ss was t h e fo r m a tio n
o f an i n h i b i t o r y s e t b e c a u se o f th e r e c o g n i t i o n o f th e
s h i f t i n c o n d i t i o n s from a c q u i s i t i o n t o e x t i n c t i o n . No
d i r e c t s u p p o r t can be g iv e n t o h i s t h e o r y , a lth o u g h s e v e r a l
t r e n d s i n th e d a t a s u g g e s t i f t h e t r a n s i t i o n w ere n o t e d ,
th e 50$ S_s w ere more u n c e r t a i n o f what i t p o r te n d e d . F or
exam ple, i f t h e v e r b a l i z a t i o n s o f th e Ss a r e c o u n te d as
i n d i c a t o r s o f t h e i r c o g n i t i o n s , t h e R-50 group c o n tin u e d
to have a h ig h a n t i c i p a t i o n o f shock t h r o u g h o u t e x t i n c t i o n .
The shape o f t h e e x t i n c t i o n c u rv e s ( F ig . 1) i s a l s o su g
g e s t i v e o f a d i f f e r e n c e i n th e e x p e c t a t i o n s o f th e two
gro u p s o f S s. T here was a d e c r e a s i n g v a r i a b i l i t y among th e
100$ Sis a s t r i a l s p r o g r e s s e d , b u t a " sa w to o th e d " c u rv e f o r
th e 50$ S s .
A number o f PRF e x p e r im e n ts have s t u d i e d th e
e f f e c t s o f p a t t e r n i n g o f r e in f o r c e m e n t on a c o n d it i o n e d
r e s p o n s e . The 50$ r e i n f o r c e m e n t can be g iv e n random ly
(a s i n t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y ) , i r r e g u l a r l y b u t n o t ran d o m ly ,
i
o r r e g u l a r l y (L ew is, i 9 6 0 , p. 1 3 5 ). When s i n g l e a l t e r n a t
io n t r i a l s o f r e i n f o r c e m e n t w ere u se d , L o n g n eck er,
K ra u sk o p f, and B itte r m a n (1952) found t h e a c q u i s i t i o n c u rv e
i
|of th e GSR was s a w to o th e d — t h a t i s , r e s p o n s e s w ere
c o n s i d e r a b ly s t r o n g e r on r e i n f o r c e d th a n n o n r e i n f o r c e d
55
t r i a l s . A lth o u g h th e r e i n f o r c e m e n t was p r e s e n t e d random ly
i n b lo c k s o f s i x t r i a l s d u r in g a c q u i s i t i o n i n th e p r e s e n t
s t u d y , n e v e r t h e l e s s th e Ss may h av e a n t i c i p a t e d sh o c k
on a p p ro x im a te ly e v e ry o t h e r t r i a l , and t h e i r e x t i n c t i o n
c u rv e r e f l e c t e d th e assum ed r e l a t i o n s h i p . I n t e r e s t i n g l y
enough, t h e PRP S_s i n Group E r e a c t e d s i m i l a r l y , th o u g h a t
a lo w e r l e v e l . On t h e same e x t i n c t i o n t r i a l s , th e E-50
Ss a l s o showed a r i s e o r f a l l i n r e s p o n s i v i t y . T here
seems l i t t l e doubt t h a t th e S_s i n t h e e x p e rim e n t w ere
t r y i n g to d i s c o v e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s — e . g . , th e v e r b a l i z a t i o n s
o f t h e p s e u d o c o n d i t io n i n g Ss n o te d i n t h e R e s u l ts s e c t i o n , j
J e n k in s and S t a n le y (1950) a l s o w r o t e , ’’A ll o t h e r j
t h i n g s b e in g e q u a l , p e rfo rm a n c e u n d e r a p a r t i a l r e i n f o r c e - !
i
ment s c h e d u le te n d s t o be somewhat lo w er t h a n u n d e r a c o n - j
' !
tin u o u s one as m easu red i n te rm s o f s i n g l e r e s p o n s e s "
(p . 2 1 3 ). I n t h i s r e s p e c t , t h e r e s u l t s o f th e p r e s e n t e x -!,
p e rim e n t d i d n o t conform t o p r e v i o u s e y e l i d c o n d i t i o n i n g
f i n d i n g s b u t d id s u p p o r t H um phreys’ (1940) GSR s t u d y . The
R-50 a n d 'E -5 0 S_s w ere n o t e q u a te d on th e b a s i s o f h a b i t
s t r e n g t h o r d r i v e ; y e t , i n s p i t e o f few er r e in f o r c e m e n t s
i
jd u rin g a c q u i s i t i o n , th e y a t t a i n e d th e same a c q u i s i t i o n
l e v e l as t h e R-100 and E-100 S s . B ecause o f th e few GSR ,
je x p e rim e n ts t h a t compare CRP-PRP g r o u p s , i t i s d i f f i c u l t
t o d e te rm in e w h e th e r t h e p r e s e n t f i n d i n g i s a t y p i c a l
lone. The d i f f e r e n c e may be due to th e r e s p o n s e system
56
s t u d i e d . P a r t i a l r e in f o r c e m e n t may a f f e c t th e c o n d it i o n e d
GSR d i f f e r e n t l y t h a n t h e e y e l i d r e s p o n s e . Then* t o o , th e
two r e s p o n s e s , GSR and e y e b lin k , a r e m easu red d i f f e r e n t l y ,
and may n o t alw ays r e f l e c t s i m i l a r changes a s a f u n c t i o n
o f t h e same in d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e ( H a l l , 19 66; P ro k a s y , H a ll,
& F a w c e tt, 19 6 2 ) . GSR d a ta a re t y p i c a l l y e x p r e s s e d i n
m ag n itu d e u n i t s w h ile e y e l i d r e s p o n s e s a re m easu red by
t h e i r p r o b a b i l i t y , c o n v e r te d i n t o a p e r c e n t a g e v a l u e .
The m ag n itu d e m easure i s n o t in d e p e n d e n t o f th e p r o b a b i l i t y
m easu re s i n c e i t i n c o r p o r a t e s i n s t a n c e s o f z ero r e s p o n s e s
(K im ble, 1961, p . 1 1 2 ) , b u t i t i s p o s s i b l e a h i g h e r
c o r r e l a t i o n b e tw ee n GSR and e y e l i d a c q u i s i t i o n d a t a would
be o b t a i n e d i f s i m i l a r m easures w ere em ployed.
P r e d i c t i o n 2_. I t was p r e d i c t e d t h a t when d i s -
c r i m i n a b i l i t y was e q u a l iz e d i n t h e E -g ro u p , th e PRE would
be re d u c e d o r e l i m i n a t e d . A gain , th e r e s u l t s s t r o n g l y ;
s u p p o r te d t h e p r e d i c t i o n . Both t h e E-50 and E-100 Ss ex
t i n g u i s h e d a t a s i m i l a r r a t e ; th e E-50 group was n o t more '
r e s i s t a n t t o e x t i n c t i o n . L ea v in g a s i d e th e d i r e c t i o n o f
t h e d i s c r i m i n a b i l i t y (h ig h o r low) f o r th e moment, i t i s
j
■very p r o b a b le t h a t b o th group s d i s c r i m i n a t e d th e e x t i n c t i o n
!
[ t r i a l s i n a l i k e m anner.
j
’ The o b t a i n e d r e s u l t s of t h e E -grou p s u p p o r t th e
bpence and P l a t t e x p e rim e n t ( 1967) b u t do n o t c o n firm th e
[findings o f R eynolds (1958) and G o l d s t e in ( 1962) . The
57
l a t t e r two s t u d i e s showed h i g h e r r e s p o n d in g f o r th e PRP
S s , R eynolds s i g n i f i c a n t l y s o . The l a c k o f c o rr e s p o n d e n c e
i s due to s e v e r a l f a c t o r s . F i r s t , none o f th e e y e l i d
s t u d i e s em ploying shock d u r in g e x t i n c t i o n used p r e c i s e l y
th e same a c q u i s i t i o n p r o c e d u r e as t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y . A l l
t h r e e c i t e d works employed t h e d e la y e d UCS r a t h e r t h a n t h e
o m itte d UCS te c h n iq u e o f n o n r e in f o r c e m e n t d u rin g t h e a c
q u i s i t i o n p e r i o d . S e c o n d ly , and more i m p o r t a n t , n e i t h e r
R eynolds (1958) n o r G o l d s t e in (1962) h e l d d i s c r i m i n a b i l i t y
c o n s t a n t i n t h e i r two e x p e r i m e n t a l g r o u p s , th e CRP and PRP
S s . Both b i a s e d t h e i r r e s u l t s by p r e s e n t i n g t h e shock
d u r in g e x t i n c t i o n a t a n i n t e r v a l th e PRP Ss h a d e x p e r ie n c e d
d u r in g " n o n r e i n f o r c e m e n t ” t r i a l s i n a c q u i s i t i o n , b u t a t an
i n t e r v a l t h e CRP S_s h a d n e v e r e n c o u n t e r e d . T h e r e f o r e , i t
seems r e a s o n a b l e t o assume t h a t th e s h i f t to e x t i n c t i o n
would be more a p p a r e n t t o t h e CRP Ss t h a n th e PRP S_s; and
any i n c r e a s e i n d r i v e by th e shock i n s e r t i o n was o v e r
shadowed by th e d i s c r i m i n a t i o n o f t h e c h an g e. The Spence
and P l a t t e x p e rim e n t (1 9 6 7 ), l i k e t h e G o l d s t e in one ( 1 9 6 2 )
u se d a m asking t a s k i n a c q u i s i t i o n , b u t e x t i n c t i o n t r i a l s
( c o n s is te d o f th e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f th e UCS o r t h e CS a l o n e ,
j
an e q u a l ly new c o n d i t i o n f o r b o th CRP and PRP S s . I n th e
p r e s e n t s tu d y t h e e x t i n c t i o n p ro c e d u r e was e q u a l i z e d f o r
Ithe E-50 and E-100 Ss; b o th had shock i n s e r t e d a t a
I
jrandom i n t e r s t i m u l u s i n t e r v a l (a s t i m u l u s change from
58
a c q u i s i t i o n ) and t h e OS d u r a t i o n and f r e q u e n c y o f t h e UCS
t h e same a s i n a c q u i s i t i o n (no s t i m u l u s c h a n g e ) .
P r e d i c t i o n 3 . The p r e d i c t i o n , b a s e d on e y e l i d
e x p e r i m e n t a t i o n , s t a t e d t h a t t h e E -50 Ss an d t h e E -100 Ss
w ould e x t i n g u i s h a s s lo w ly a s t h e R -50 S s . The p r e d i c t i o n
was n o t s u p p o r t e d b y t h e r e s u l t s . I n f a c t , t h e i n s e r t i o n
o f sh o c k d u r i n g e x t i n c t i o n h a d t h e o p p o s i t e e f f e c t . The
E -50 and E -100 g r o u p s e x t i n g u i s h e d a s r a p i d l y a s t h e R -100
g ro u p ; d i s c r i m i n a t i o n was m ax im ized r a t h e r t h a n m in im iz e d .
The r e s u l t s o f t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y f i t b e s t w i t h t h e
d a t a o f B r i d g e r and M andel ( 1 9 6 5 ) . T hey, t o o , fo u n d no j
i
PRE i n t h e i r e x p e r i m e n t a l S s, t h e In fo rm e d g r o u p s ; t h e
In fo rm e d Ss e x t i n g u i s h e d s i m i l a r l y t o t h e E o n in fo rm e d j
( r e g u l a r ) S s . E v i d e n t l y , t h e m o d if i e d M c A l l i s t e r t r i a l s
f u n c t i o n e d l i k e "no m ore sh o ck " i n s t r u c t i o n s , a maximum
d i s c r i m i n a b i l i t y p r o c e d u r e . The r e s p o n s e s on t h e q u e s
t i o n n a i r e i n d i c a t e d t h a t m ost Ss d i s c r i m i n a t e d a c hang e a t ;
t h e t r a n s i t i o n fro m a c q u i s i t i o n t o e x t i n c t i o n . B r i d g e r
and M andel a l s o fo u n d a n o n s i g n i f i c a n t t r e n d to w a rd a r e - ;
I v e r s e d PRE, a s e v in c e d i n t h e l a s t b l o c k o f e x t i n c t i o n
t
I t r i a l s i n t h e p r e s e n t e x p e r i m e n t . T h e r e f o r e , a d d i t i o n a l
i
!s u p p o r t i s g i v e n t o t h e G ra n t and S c h ip p e r t h e o r i z i n g
i
!(1 9 5 2 ) t h a t i f d i s c r i m i n a b i l i t y i s e q u a l i z e d , ORE Ss w ould
show m ore r e s i s t a n c e t o e x t i n c t i o n b e c a u s e o f t h e l a r g e r
i
L.______ ..- ........- . - -__ |
59
number o f r e i n f o r c e m e n t s i n a c q u i s i t i o n . The f i n d i n g
a l s o s u p p o r ts S p e n c e ’ s (I9 6 0 ) th e o r y o f c l a s s i c a l c o n d i t
i o n in g w here H ( h a b i t s t r e n g t h ) i s a f u n c t i o n o f th e
number o f CS-UCS p a i r i n g s .
None o f t h e d a ta from p r e v io u s e y e l i d c o n d i t i o n
in g e x p e rim e n ts w ould p r e d i c t th e r e s u l t s o f lo w er r e s
p o n d in g i n th e E-50 and E-100 g r o u p s . E very e x p e rim e n t
t h a t u se d s h o c k ^ in e x t i n c t i o n showed, a t l e a s t f o r th e
PRP S s , a h i g h e r l e v e l o f re s p o n d in g when compared w i t h
Ss e x t i n g u i s h e d i n a s t a n d a r d f a s h i o n . The use o f t h e UCS
d u r in g e x t i n c t i o n was assum ed t o m a i n t a i n d r i v e - l e v e l . The
p a r t i c u l a r u se o f CS-UCS e x t i n c t i o n t r i a l s , i n f a c t ,
r e s u l t e d i n such h ig h l e v e l s o f r e s p o n s i v i t y t h a t p o s s i b l e
c o n d i t i o n i n g o f th e Ss was s u s p e c t e d . I n a d d i t i o n , t h e
f i n d i n g s do n o t s u p p o r t th e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s o f B r id g e r and j
Mandel (1965) who a t t r i b u t e d th e r a p i d d ecrem e n t o f t h e j
CR’ s o f th e In fo rm ed S_s t o a r e d u c t i o n i n th e m e d ia te d
component o f th e CR— t h a t o f a n t i c i p a t i o n o r f e a r . A l l I
su b g ro u p s i n t h e p r e s e n t e x p e rim e n t e v a l u a t e d th e shock as
;being o f th e same s u b j e c t i v e i n t e n s i t y , " a n n o y in g ." Nor
I
;can i t be s a i d t h a t th e E-50 and E-100 Ss c e a se d t o be
i
!
b o t h e r e d by th e shock as opposed to th e o t h e r S s . The com
m ents o f th e E-100 group i n d i c a t e d th e y w ere grow ing more
r a t h e r th a n l e s s s e n s i t i v e t o shock as e x t i n c t i o n p r o
g r e s s e d . Yet th e y e x t i n g u i s h e d t o a marked d e g re e l i k e
60
t h e R-100 Ss who w ere n e v e r sh o cked d u r in g e x t i n c t i o n .
I t i s a l s o d o u b t f u l from th e q u e s t i o n n a i r e an sw e rs and
t h e S s 1 comments t h a t th e E-50 and E-100 c e a s e d t o a n t i c i
p a t e th e s h o c k . As f a r as t h e p r e s e n t d a t a a r e c o n c e rn e d ,
th e e x t i n c t i o n o f t h e CR can n o t be a c c o u n te d f o r i n term s
o f l o s s o f f e a r o r l o s s o f a n t i c i p a t i o n o f sh o c k .
I f f e a r o f sh o ck o r l o s s o f a n t i c i p a t i o n o f
sh o ck a r e e l i m i n a t e d as r e l e v a n t v a r i a b l e s , what f a c t o r s
c o u ld e x p l a i n th e o b t a i n e d r e s u l t s ? F i r s t , p r o c e d u r a l
I
d i f f e r e n c e s b e tw ee n th e p r e s e n t s tu d y and th e e y e l i d work
may a c c o u n t f o r some o f th e d i s c r e p a n c y . The shock was
i n s e r t e d a t a random i n t e r v a l d u r in g e x t i n c t i o n ; much
i
o f th e e y e l i d r e s e a r c h ( i . e . , M c A l l i s t e r , 1953) i n s e r t e d !
sho ck a t a c o n s t a n t tim e i n t e r v a l . The Spence and P l a t t j
j
s tu d y ( 1967) u se d random CS, UCS a lo n e t r i a l s a f t e r co n d - j
i
i t i o n i n g u n d e r a m asking t a s k . When no m asking t a s k i s j
u se d i n a c q u i s i t i o n and when th e UCS i s random ly p r e s e n t e d
d u r in g e x t i n c t i o n , i t i s p r o b a b ly th e E-50 and E-100 Ss
r e g a r d e d t h e cue f u n c t i o n o f th e CS more as th e P-50
and P-100 Ss d id d u r in g a c q u i s i t i o n . The comments o f th e
E Ss i n d i c a t e d t h a t , th o u g h i t view ed t h e CS as a
c o n tin u e d p r e d i c t o r o f sh o c k , i t a l s o r e c o g n i z e d t h e r a n
domness o f th e CS-UCS i n t e r v a l . Along w ith th e n o n - o p tim a l ;
c o n d i t i o n i n g i n t e r s t i m u l u s i n t e r v a l , th e co nseq u en ce o f
t h e random ness was r e s p o n s e d ecrem en t i n th e E -g ro u p ,
l i k e t h e P -g ro u p . j
61
Again i t s h o u ld be r e i t e r a t e d t h a t some o f th e
h ig h l e v e l o f resp o n d in g , i n t h e e y e l i d e x t i n c t i o n t r i a l s
may be due t o s e n s i t i z a t i o n a n d /o r c o n d i t i o n i n g a t lo n g
i n t e r v a l s . W ith in o r b etw een -S c o n t r o l s a r e n o t t y p i c a l l y
em ployed i n e y e l i d c o n d i t i o n i n g r e s e a r c h . The random
p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e UCS d u r in g e x t i n c t i o n i n th e p r e s e n t
e x p e rim e n t would p r e c l u d e GSR c o n d i t i o n i n g .
A nother f e a s i b l e e x p l a n a t i o n t h a t f i t s th e d a t a
i s t h a t au tonom ic r e s p o n s e s c an n o t be e q u a te d w ith a n x i e t y ,
p a r t i c u l a r l y i f a n x i e t y i s d e f i n e d as " f e a r o f s h o c k ."
O th e r m o t i v a t i o n a l o r a s s o c i a t i v e ( c o g n i t i v e ) f a c t o r s may
be more i m p o r t a n t . P e r r y and Moore (1965) s u g g e s te d t h a t
r e s i s t a n c e t o e x t i n c t i o n may be a f u n c t i o n o f th e S s ’
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f th e change from a c q u i s i t i o n t o e x t i n c t
i o n ; " th e change i s r e c o g n i z e d b u t what does i t mean?" The |
i
s t a t e m e n t can be r e p h r a s e d — th e c e r t a i n t y o r u n c e r t a i n t y I
o f th e m eaning o f th e CS may be a s i g n i f i c a n t f a c t o r i n
r e s i s t a n c e t o e x t i n c t i o n . Under t h i s l i n e o f r e a s o n i n g ,
w hat t h e CS s i g n a l e d d u r in g e x t i n c t i o n became unambiguous
o r " c e r t a i n f o r th e R -100, E -5 0 , and E-100 S s ; as a r e s u l t ,
t h e i r autonom ic r e p o n d in g d e c r e a s e d . But t h e cue f u n c t -
i
i o n o f th e CS was l e s s i n f o r m a t i v e , more u n c e r t a i n f o r th e
R-50 S s; t h e r e f o r e t h e i r l e v e l o f autonom ic re s p o n d in g
i s h i g h e r ,
A l a r g e body o f e x p e r i m e n t a t io n d e a l s w ith th e
62
c e r t a i n i y - u n c e r t a i n t y d im e n sio n and i t s e f f e c t on r e s
p o n s e s . Some t h e o r i s t s view u n c e r t a i n t y a s a m o t i v a t i o n
a l v a r i a b l e , i n c r e a s i n g th e d r i v e l e v e l o f th e S_. C ofer
and Apley (19 64, p . 378) s t a t e t h a t t h e n o t i o n t h a t c e r
t a i n t y o r u n c e r t a i n t y o f th e c o n f i r m a t i o n o f an e x p e c t
a t i o n may be c l o s e l y t i e d t o a f f e c t i v e s t a t e s i s p ro m in e n t
i n t r e a t m e n t s o f c o n f l i c t and f r u s t r a t i o n . The i d e a t h a t
u n c e r t a i n t y i s a d i s c r e p a n c y from a p r e v a i l i n g a d a p t a t i o n
l e v e l and t h e r e f o r e m o t i v a t i n g ( a r o u s in g ) f i g u r e s a l s o
i n th e t h e o r i e s o f Peak (1 9 5 8 ), Hebb ( 1 9 5 5 ), and M andler
i
( 1 9 6 2 ). The m o t i v a t i o n o f u n c e r t a i n t y and i t s accompany
i n g a r o u s a l i s v iew ed by th e l a t t e r t h e o r i s t s as. a c u e -
r e l a t e d a f f a i r r a t h e r t h a n a f a c t o r a r i s i n g from d r i v e s .
R e se a rc h w i t h t h e o r i e n t a t i o n .r e a c t i o n (OR) j
i s a l s o c o n c e rn e d w ith t h e im p o rta n c e o f u n c e r t a i n t y i n j
m a i n t a i n i n g a r e l a t i v e l y h ig h l e v e l o f auton om ic a r o u s a l .
B e rly n e ( i 9 6 0 , pp . 96- I O 3 ) l i s t s u n c e r t a i n t y a s one o f t h e |
s e v e n f a c t o r s d e t e r m i n i n g t h e o c c u r r e n c e o f s e l e c t i v e |
o r i e n t i n g r e s p o n s e s . I n h i s book on th e o r i e n t a t i o n r e
a c t i o n , Lynn ( 1 9 6 6 ) subsumes u n c e r t a i n t y u n d e r n o v e l t y ,
i
one o f t h e t h r e e m ain s i t u a t i o n s e v o k in g t h e OR, d e f in e d
a s th e r e a c t i o n o f p a y in g a t t e n t i o n t o n o v e l and im p o r ta n t ;
I
stimuli. Whereas Berlyne speaks of the OR as a drive j
based on external stimulation, Maltzman and Raskin (1965) 1
state that the OR concept is functionally related to
63
p e rfo rm a n c e i n a manner d i f f e r e n t from t h a t im p lie d by
th e c o n c e p t o f an e m o t i o n a l ly b a se d d r i v e . They s p e c i f i c
a l l y say t h a t o c c u r r e n c e o f a GSR c a n n o t be u n e q u iv o c a lly
t a k e n as a m easure o f em o tio n o r d r i v e s i n c e m easu res o f
c o n d u c ta n c e l e v e l have c o n s i s t e n t l y f a i l e d t o c o r r e l a t e
w ith t h e M a n ife s t A n x ie ty S c a le o r to r e l a t e t o p e rfo rm a n c e
i n th e m anner r e q u i r e d by d r i v e t h e o r y .
Which o f t h e f o r e g o i n g f a c t o r s a c c o u n ts b e s t
f o r th e o b t a i n e d r e s u l t s ? Any o r a l l i n c o m b in a tio n
c o u ld e x p l a i n t h e r a p i d e x t i n c t i o n o f t h e E -g ro u p . Prom
t h e e v id e n c e , h ow ever, i t seems p r o b a b le t h a t th e p r e s e n t
p o p u l a t i o n s t u d i e d , c o l l e g e s t u d e n t s , a p p ro a c h e d th e
c l a s s i c a l c o n d i t i o n i n g e x p e rim e n t as a p r o b le m - s o lv in g !
i
!
s i t u a t i o n . Shock p e r s e , a f t e r t h e i n i t i a l e x p e r i e n c e , |
j
d id n o t p ro d u c e a h ig h f e a r d r i v e among th e S_s. When
th e p ro blem was s o lv e d and th e UCS o c c u r r e d a t a non-
o p tim a l i n t e r v a l , r e s p o n s i v i t y . d e c l i n e d t o a d a p t a t i o n l e v e l.!
The Ss who w ere s t i l l t r y i n g to s o lv e t h e p ro b lem , th e
R-bO g ro u p , d id n o t e x t i n g u i s h .
I n summary, th e g e n e r a l h y p o t h e s is o f th e
^experiment was s u b s t a n t i a t e d : when d i s c r i m i n a b i l i t y i s
I
E q u a l iz e d , th e PRE i s re d u c e d o r e l i m i n a t e d . The d a ta
l e n t s u p p o r t t o S p e n c e ’ s D i s c r i m i n a t i o n h y p o t h e s is ( 196 6)
jthat a c o g n i t i v e s e t n o t t o re s p o n d d e v e lo p s as a r e s u l t
I
b f th e d i s c r i m i n a t i o n . However, Spence s t a t e d t h a t t h e :
1
p e t d e v e lo p e d a s a f u n c t i o n o f th e Ss d i s c r i m i n a t i n g t h e j
6k
change from a c q u i s i t i o n t o e x t i n c t i o n . I n t h i s i n s t a n c e ,
th e p r e s e n t r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e d t h a t j u s t d i s c r i m i n a t i n g
t h e change may n o t be t h e co m p lete answ er t o t h e e x t i n c t
i o n p r o c e s s i n humans. How th e Ss i n t e r p r e t t h e change
may be more r e l e v a n t . The f i n d i n g t h a t th e UCS d i d n o t
m a i n t a i n th e d r i v e l e v e l o f th e S_s d u r i n g e x t i n c t i o n
s u g g e s t s t h a t S p e n c e ’ s d r i v e c o n c e p t may have some l i m i t
a t i o n s when t h e GSR i s th e c o n d it i o n e d re s p o n s e s t u d i e d .
I t i s a l s o p o s s i b l e - t h a t - w i t h GSR c o n d i t i o n i n g t h e number
o f UCS p r e s e n t a t i o n s h a s a d i f f e r e n t f u n c t i o n a l r e l a t i o n
s h ip t o th e CR; o r th e p o s t u l a t e d i n h i b i t o r y s e t b a se d
on th e c o g n i t i o n s o f t h e S _ assum es a g r e a t e r v a l u e , o u t
w e ig h in g any i n c r e a s e i n d r i v e .
The D i s c r i m i n a t i o n h y p o t h e s is o f Spence h o ld s
g r e a t p ro m ise as an e x p l a n a t i o n f o r th e PRE i n human
a v e r s i v e c o n d i t i o n i n g . However, th e s ta te m e n t Lewis
( i 96 0 ) made a t t h e c o n c lu s io n o f h i s e x h a u s t i v e s tu d y
o f PRE l i t e r a t u r e s t i l l i s v a l i d — no s i n g l e th e o r y can
a c c o u n t f o r a l l t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l f i n d i n g s . Even i n th e
l i m i t e d a r e a o f c l a s s i c a l c o n d i t i o n i n g o f human Ss t h e r e
| i s a- need f o r f u r t h e r e x p e r i m e n t a t io n on th e PRE— how
|
l i t i s o b t a i n e d and s u s t a i n e d .
CHAPTER V II
SUMMARY
Spence a d v an ced a th e o r y o f e x t i n c t i o n f o r
c l a s s i c a l a v e r s i v e c o n d i t i o n i n g o f human Ss c a l l e d th e
D i s c r i m i n a t i o n h y p o t h e s i s . He p o s t u l a t e d t h a t human Ss
d i s c r i m i n a t e th e change from a c q u i s i t i o n t o e x t i n c t i o n
and a d o p t an i n h i b i t o r y s e t n o t to r e s p o n d . When
p a r t i a l r e i n f o r c e m e n t (PRP) i s u s e d , d i s c r i m i n a t i o n o f th e
change i s d e la y e d , and r e s p o n s e d e crem en t i s l e s s . The
t h e o r y e v o lv e d from a l a r g e body o f e m p i r i c a l d a ta
g a t h e r e d i n e y e l i d c o n d i t i o n i n g e x p e r im e n ts .
An e x p e rim e n t was c o n d u c te d t o t e s t i m p l i c a t i o n s
o f S p e n c e 's D i s c r i m i n a t i o n h y p o t h e s is as th e y p e r t a i n to
t h e p a r t i a l r e i n f o r c e m e n t e f f e c t .( P R E ) u n d e r a d i f f e r e n t
r e s p o n s e s y s te m , th e g a l v a n i c s k i n r e s p o n s e (GSR). The
g e n e r a l h y p o t h e s i s o f th e e x p e rim e n t was: when d i s c r i m i n
a b i l i t y i s e q u a l i z e d , th e PRE i s re d u c e d o r e l i m i n a t e d .
The S_s w ere 72 c o l l e g e s t u d e n t s random ly a s s ig n e d
jto one o f t h r e e m ain g ro u p s , two e x p e r i m e n t a l group s
|(Groups R and E) and a p s e u d o c o n d i t io n i n g c o n t r o l group
l
i(Group P) . H a lf o f t h e S_s i n eac h group were c o n d it i o n e d
i
u n d e r a 100$ r e i n f o r c e m e n t s c h e d u le c o n tin u o u s r e i n
fo rc e m e n t (CRP), and th e o t h e r h a l f w ere c o n d i t i o n e d u n d e r
6 5 .......... ___________ ____________ ______
v
66
a 50% r e i n f o r c e m e n t s c h e d u le (PRF). The r e g u l a r group
(Group R) was e x t i n g u i s h e d u n d e r shock i n s e r t e d t r i a l s ;
t h e UCS o c c u r r e d random ly anywhere from 10 s e c s , a f t e r th e
CS t o 10 s e c s , b e f o r e th e end o f th e i n t e r t r i a l i n t e r v a l
w hich ra n g e d from 30 t o 50 s e c s . The CS was a c i r c l e
f l a s h e d from a p r o j e c t o r and had a d u r a t i o n o f 0 .5 s e c .
t h r o u g h o u t. The CS-UCS i n t e r v a l was 0 .5 s e c . ; th e UCS
a 0 .5 se c.- .'-.shock, and i t s o n s e t o c c u r re d w ith th e o f f s e t
o f t h e CS. The e x p e r i m e n t a l seq uen ce was as f o l lo w s : 1
P r e t e s t t r i a l , a sho ck workup s e r i e s fo llo w e d by 3 sh o ck
s e n s i t i z a t i o n t r i a l s , 4 A d a p ta tio n t r i a l s , 24 A c q u i s i t i o n
I
t r i a l s , and 16 E x t i n c t i o n t r i a l s , fo llo w e d by a
l
q u e s t i o n n a i r e .
A n aly ses o f t h e d a t a showed t h a t a l l e x p e r im e n ta l
Ss c o n d it i o n e d re s p o n d e d a t th e same l e v e l a t th e end of
a c q u i s i t i o n . The r e s u l t s and i m p l i c a t i o n s t h e r e o f i n j
term s o f t h r e e s p e c i f i c p r e d i c i t i o n s g e n e r a t e d from t h e
g e n e r a l h y p o t h e s is w ere:
1. The p r e d i c t i o n t h a t a PRE would d i f f e r e n t i a t e I
betw een th e R-50 and R-100 Ss was s t r o n g l y s u p p o r te d ,
j 2. The p r e d i c t i o n t h a t when d i s c r i m i n a b i l i t y !
i s e q u a l i z e d i n th e E -g ro u p , t h e PRE would be re d u c e d
I
|o r e l i m i n a t e d was a l s o s t r o n g l y s u p p o r te d by th e d a t a .
iBoth th e E-50 and E-100 Ss e x t i n g u i s h e d a t a s i m i l a r
r a t e w ith no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e . j
67
3. The p r e d i c t i o n t h a t th e E -g ro u p wouOld ex
t i n g u i s h a s slo w ly as th e R -50 group was n o t s u p p o r t e d .
The E -g ro u p e x t i n g u i s h e d a s r a p i d l y as t h e R-100 S s;
t h e r e f o r e e x t i n c t i o n was m axim ized by sho ck i n s e r t i o n s .
I t was s u g g e s te d t h a t th e f a i l u r e o f th e UCS t o m a i n t a i n
d r i v e l e v e l c o u ld be due t o s e v e r a l f a c t o r s : p r o c e d u r a l
d i f f e r e n c e s o r th e r e s p o n s e sy stem m e a su re d . A ltho ugh
S p e n c e ’ s D i s c r i m i n a t i o n h y p o t h e s is was s u p p o r t e d , i t was
c o n c lu d e d t h a t S s ’ d i s c r i m i n a t i o n o f th e change from
a c q u i s i t i o n t o e x t i n c t i o n may n o t be th e co m p lete answ er
t o e x t i n c t i o n . How t h e Ss i n t e r p r e t th e change may be
more r e l e v a n t .
REFERENCES
68
A n d e rso n , N. H. C om parison o f d i f f e r e n t p o p u l a t i o n s :
R e s i s t a n c e t o e x t i n c t i o n and t r a n s f e r . P s y c h o l o g i c a l
R eview , 19 63, 70, 1 6 2-179 .
B e r ly n e , D. E. C o n f l i c t , a r o u s a l , and c u r i o s i t y . New
York: M cG raw -H ill, I9 6 0 .
B r i d g e r , W. H ., and M andel, I . J . A b o l i t i o n o f th e PRE
by i n s t r u c t i o n s i n GSR c o n d i t i o n i n g , J o u r n a l o f
E x p e r im e n ta l P s y c h o lo g y , 1956, 6 9 , 476-482.
C o f e r , C. N ., a n d -A p le y , M. H. , M o t i v a t i o n : Theory and
r e s e a r c h . New York: W iley , 1964.
Dawson, M. E . , and G rin g s , W. W. C om parison o f c l a s s i c a l
c o n d i t i o n i n g and r e l a t i o n a l l e a r n i n g . J o u r n a l o f
E x p e r im e n ta l P s y c h o lo g y , 1968, 7 6 , 227-231.
E d w ard s, A. L. E x p e r im e n ta l d e s i g n i n p s y c h o l o g i c a l
r e s e a r c h . (Rev. e d . ) New York: H o l t , R i n e h a r t , and
W in sto n , 1 9 6 3 .
G o l d s t e i n , H. The e f f e c t s o f s e t f a c t o r s and r e in f o r c e m e n t
s c h e d u le s on t h e a c q u i s i t i o n and e x t i n c t i o n o f t h e
c o n d it i o n e d e y e l i d r e s p o n s e . U n p u b lish e d Ph.D. d i s - j
s e r t a t i o n . S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y o f Iow a, 1 9 6 2 . i
|
G r a n t, D. A ., and Hake, W. W. Dark a d a p t a t i o n and th e i
Humphreys random r e i n f o r c e m e n t phenomenon i n human ;
e y e l i d c o n d i t i o n i n g . J o u r n a l o f E x p e r im e n ta l P s y c h o lo g y ,1
3.951, 42, 417 -4 2 3 . i
G ra n t, D. A ., M eyer, D. R ., and Hake, W. W. P r o p o r t i o n a l
r e i n f o r c e m e n t and e x t i n c t i o n o f th e c o n d it i o n e d GSR.
J o u r n a l o f E x p e r im e n ta l P s y c h o lo g y , 1950, 4 2 , 9 7-1 01.
G r a n t, D. A ., and S c h ip p e r , L. M. A c q u i s i t i o n and e x t i n c t - ;
io n o f c o n d i t i o n e d e y e l i d r e s p o n s e s as a f u n c t i o n o f
f i x e d r a t i o random r e i n f o r c e m e n t . J o u r n a l o f E x p e r i
m e n ta l P s y c h o lo g y , 1952, 4 3 , 313-320.
G r a n t, D. A ., S c h ip p e r , L. M., and R o ss, B. M. E f f e c t s o f
j i n t e r t r i a l i n t e r v a l d u r in g a c q u i s i t i o n and e x t i n c t i o n o f ;
! th e c o n d it i o n e d e y e l i d re s p o n s e f o llo w in g p a r t i a l
i r e i n f o r c e m e n t . J o u r n a l o f E x p e rim e n ta l P sy c h o lo g y ,
| 1952, 4_4, 20 3-210.
69
G r in g s , W. W. P r e p a r a t o r y s e t v a r i a b l e s i n th e c l a s s i c a l
c o n d i t i o n i n g o f auton om ic v a r i a b l e s . P s y c h o l o g i c a l
R eview 3 i 9 6 0 , 67, 243 -2 5 2 .
G r in g s , W. W. C l a s s i c a l c o n d i t i o n i n g . I n M. H. Marx (Ed.),,
T h e o r ie s i n co n tem po rary p s y c h o lo g y . New York:
M a c m illa n , 1 9 6 3 . Pp. 495-5251
G r in g s , W. W. V e r b a l - P e r c e p t u a l f a c t o r s i n t h e c o n d i t i o n
in g o f autonom ic r e s p o n s e s . I n W. P. P ro k asy (E d .)
C l a s s i c a l C o n d i ti o n i n g . New York: A p p le to n - C e n tu r y -
C r o f t s , 1965, Pp. 7 1 -o 9 .
G r in g s , W. W., L o c k h a r t, R. S . , and Dameron, L. E. C o n d it
i o n i n g auto nom ic r e s p o n s e s o f m e n ta lly subnorm al
i n d i v i d u a l s . P s y c h o l o g i c a l M onographs, 1962, 7 6 , No. 39,,
Whole No. 558.
H a l l , J . F. The p sy c h o lo g y o f l e a r n i n g . New York:
L i p p i n c o t t , i 96 0 .
i
H ayes, W. L. S t a t i s t i c s f o r p s y c h o l o g i s t s . New York:
H o l t , R i n e h a r t , and W in sto n , 196 3 . !
Hebb, D. 0 . D riv e s and C .N .S. (C o n c e p tu a l n e rv o u s s y s te m ) .
P s y c h o l o g i c a l R eview , 1955, 62, 2 43 -2 54.
Humphreys, L. G. The e f f e c t o f random a l t e r n a t i o n o f ;
■ r e i n f o r c e m e n t on t h e a c q u i s i t i o n and e x t i n c t i o n o f
c o n d i t i o n e d e y e l i d r e a c t i o n s . J o u r n a l o f E x p e r im e n ta l ,
P s y c h o lo g y , 1939, 25., 1 41-15 8.
Humphreys, L. G. E x t i n c t i o n o f c o n d it i o n e d g a lv a n ic s k in
r e s p o n s e s f o llo w in g two c o n d i t i o n s o f r e i n f o r c e m e n t .
J o u r n a l o f E x p e rim e n ta l P s y c h o lo g y , 1940, 2 7 , 7 1 -7 5 .
J e n k i n s , W. 0 . , and S t a n l e y , J . C ., J r . P a r t i a l r e i n f o r c e
m ent: a re v ie w and a c r i t i q u e . P s y c h o l o g i c a l B u l l e t i n ,
1950, 47, 19 3 -2 3 4 .
K im ble, G.A. H ilg a r d and M arquis * c o n d i t i o n i n g and
l e a r n i n g . (2nd e d . ) New York: A p p l e to n - C e n tu r y - C r o f t s ,
1961.
L ew is, D. J . P a r t i a l r e i n f o r c e m e n t . A s e l e c t i v e re v ie w o f
t h e l i t e r a t u r e s i n c e 1950. P s y c h o l o g i c a l B u l l e t i n ,
| I960, 57, 1-28.
jL ongnecker, E. D ., K ra u sk o p f, J . , and B i tte r m a n , M. E. |
E x t i n c t i o n f o llo w in g a l t e r n a t i n g and random p a r t i a l r e i n
f o r c e m e n t. A m erican J o u r n a l o f P sy c h o lo g y , 1952, 6 5 , 1
5 8 0 -5 8 7 . ......... ------------------------- j
70 c
Lynn, R. A t t e n t i o n , A r o u s a l , and t h e o r i e n t a t i o n r e a c t i o n *
New York: Pergamon P r e s s , 1906.
M c A l l i s t e r , W. R. Ehe e f f e c t on e y e l i d c o n d i t i o n i n g o f
s h i f t i n g t h e CS-UCS i n t e r v a l . J o u r n a l o f E x p e r im e n ta l
P s y c h o lo g y , 1953, .45, 4 2 3-428 .
M altzm an, I . , and R a s k in , D. C. E f f e c t s o f i n d i v i d u a l
d i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e o r i e n t i n g r e f l e x on c o n d i t i o n i n g
and complex p r o c e s s e s . J o u r n a l o f E x p e r im e n ta l R e s e a rc h
i n P e r s o n a l i t y , 196 5, _1, 1 -1 6 .
M an d ler, G. E m otion . I n R. N. Brown, E. G a l a n t e r , E. H.
H e ss, and G. M andler ( E d s . ) , New d i r e c t i o n s i n p s y c h o l
ogy . New York: H o l t , R i n e h a r t , and W in sto n , 1962.
Pp. 2 67-343 .
M e r i t s e r , C. L . , & D o e r l l e r , L. G. The c o n d it i o n e d g a l
v a n ic r e s p o n s e u n d e r two modes o f r e i n f o r c e m e n t .
J o u r n a l o f Speech and H e a rin g D i s o r d e r s , 1954, 19,
' 3 50 -3 59.
M oore, J . W., and Gormezano, I . E f f e c t s o f o m itte d v e r s u s
d e la y e d UCS on c l a s s i c a l e y e l i d c o n d i t i o n i n g u n d e r
p a r t i a l r e i n f o r c e m e n t . J o u r n a l o f E x p e r im e n ta l P s y c h o l
ogy, 1963, 65, 2 4 8-257 .
P e a k , H. P s y c h o l o g i c a l s t r u c t u r e and p s y c h o l o g i c a l a c t
i v i t y . P s y c h o l o g i c a l Review, 1958, 6 5 , 3 25 -3 47. :
— I
P e r r y , S. L . , and M oore, J . W. The p a r t i a l - r e i n f o r c e m e n t j
e f f e c t s u s t a i n e d th ro u g h b lo c k s o f - c o n t i n u o u s r e i n - j
fo rc e m e n t i n c l a s s i c a l e y e l i d c o n d i t i o n i n g . J o u r n a l o f j
E x p e r im e n ta l P s y c h o lo g y , 1965, 69., 1 5 8 - l 6 l . j
P r i c e , L. E . , A b b o tt, D. W., and Vandam ent, W. E. E f f e c t s
o f CS and UCS change on e x t i n c t i o n o f t h e c o n d it i o n e d j
e y e l i d r e s p o n s e . J o u r n a l o f E x p e r im e n ta l P sy c h o lo g y ,
1965, 4, 4 3 7 -4 3 9 . : .
P ro k a s y , W. P . , F a w c e tt, J . T . , and H a l l , J . F. R e c r u i t - ;
m ent, l a t e n c y , m a g n itu d e , and a m p litu d e o f th e GSR j
as a f u n c t i o n o f th e i n t e r s t i m u l u s i n t e r v a l . J o u r n a l
o f E x p e r im e n ta l P s y c h o lo g y , 1962, £ 4 , 513 -518.
R e s c o r l a , R. A. P a v lo v ia n c o n d i t i o n i n g and i t s p r o p e r
c o n t r o l p r o c e d u r e . P s y c h o l o g i c a l Review , 196 7, 74,
71- 8 0 .
71
R e y n o ld s, W. P. A c q u i s i t i o n and e x t i n c t i o n o f th e con
d i t i o n e d e y e l i d r e s p o n s e f o l lo w in g p a r t i a l and con
t in u o u s r e i n f o r c e m e n t . J o u r n a l o f E x p e r im e n ta l Psych
o l o g y , 1958, 55, 3 3 5-341 .
S pence, K. W. B e h a v io r th e o r y and c o n d i t i o n i n g . New
Haven: Y ale U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1958.
S p en ce, K. W. C o g n itiv e — f a c t o r s i n the e x t i n c t i o n o f th e
c o n d it i o n e d e y e l i d r e s p o n s e i n humans. S c i e n c e , 1963*
140, 1224-1225.
S pence, K. W. C o g n itiv e and d r i v e f a c t o r s i n th e e x t i n c t
i o n o f th e c o n d i t i o n e d e y e b l in k i n human s u b j e c t s .
P s y c h o l o g i c a l Review , 1966a, 73_, 445-458.
S pence, K. ¥ . E x t i n c t i o n o f th e human e y e l i d CR as a
f u n c t i o n o f p r e s e n c e o r a b se n c e o f th e UCS d u rin g
e x t i n c t i o n . J o u r n a l o f E x p e r im e n ta l P s y c h o lo g y , 1966b,
I n p r e s s .
S p en ce, K. W., Homzie, M. J . , and R u tle d g e , E. G.
E x t i n c t i o n o f th e human e y e l i d CR as a f u n c t i o n o f th e
d i s c r i m i n a b i l i t y o f th e change from a c q u i s i t i o n to
e x t i n c t i o n . J o u r n a l o f E x p e rim e n ta l P s y c h o lo g y , 1964,
Sj_3 545 -5 5 2 .
S pence, K. W., and P l a t t , J . R. E f f e c t s o f p a r t i a l r e i n
fo rc e m e n t on a c q u i s i t i o n and e x t i n c t i o n o f th e c o n d i t
io n e d e y e b l in k i n a m asking s i t u a t i o n . J o u r n a l o f
E x p e r im e n ta l P s y c h o lo g y , 196 7 , 74, 259- 2 6 3 .
S p en ce, K. ¥ . , R u tle d g e , E. P . , and- T a l b o t t , J . H. E f f e c t
o f number o f a c q u i s i t i o n t r i a l s and t h e p r e s e n c e or
a b se n c e o f th e UCS on e x t i n c t i o n of t h e e y e l i d CR.
J o u r n a l o f E x p e r im e n ta l P s y c h o lo g y , 19 6 3 , 6 6 , 286-291.
AFPENDICES
APPENDIX A
INSTRUCTIONS
1. N a tu re o f t h e G a lv a n ic S kin R esponse
2. P r e t e s t I n s t r u c t i o n s
3. Shock Workup I n s t r u c t i o n s
A d a p ta tio n I n s t r u c t i o n s
5. E x p e r im e n ta l I n s t r u c t i o n s
73
INSTRUCTIONS #1
NATURE OP THE GALVANIC SKIN RESPONSE (GSR)
The p u rp o s e o f t h e p r e s e n t e x p e rim e n t i s to
s tu d y i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e GSR f o l lo w in g r e c e i p t
o f sh o c k . Some a u t h o r i t i e s t h i n k th e r e s p o n s e s when
m ea su re d w i l l f a l l i n t o th e n o rm al d i s t r i b u t i o n c u rv e ;
o t h e r s b e l i e v e t h a t m ost s u b j e c t s have s i m i l a r r e s p o n s e s
t o sh o c k . W hile t h e r e c o r d i n g m achine i s b e in g c a l i b r a t e d ,
p e rh a p s t h e b r i e f d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e g a l v a n i c s k i n r e s
po n se (GSR) w hich f o llo w s w i l l be o f i n t e r e s t t o you.
The s u r f a c e o f th e s k i n has some i n t e r e s t i n g
e l e c t r i c a l p r o p e r t i e s . One o f t h e s e i s t h e f a c t t h a t i f
you p u t two m e ta l e l e c t r o d e s a t d i f f e r e n t p l a c e s on th e
b o d y , t h e r e w i l l be a c o n t i n u a l change i n e l e c t r i c a l
p o t e n t i a l e v i d e n t b e tw ee n t h e s e two e l e c t r o d e s . I t i s
much as i f th e s k i n w ere a v e ry t i n y b a t t e r y , th e v o l t a g e
o f w hich was f l u c t u a t i n g w ith th e i n t e r n a l w o rk in g s o f
i
t h e o rg a n is m . We have d i s c o v e r e d , f o r exam p le, t h a t con
c e n t r a t i n g on an a r i t h m e t i c p ro b lem l e a d s t o a d i f f e r e n t
!
j p a t t e r n o f e l e c t r i c a l waves b e tw ee n t h e f r o n t and th e
b ack o f t h e hand th a n does sim p ly s i t t i n g q u i e t l y w ith
t h e e y e s c l o s e d . P e rh ap s you have known o f t h i s pheno
mena b e c a u s e o f t h e f a c t t h a t i t h as b e en u se d i n th e
s o - c a l l e d " l i e d e t e c t o r . " T h ere i s r e a s o n t o b e l i e v e
t h a t t h e e l e c t r i c a l r e s p o n s e s a r e d i f f e r e n t when an i n -
75
dividual is trying to misrepresent information than when
he is telling the truth.
If you are interested in the physics involved
in this particular measurement, it may be informative
to know that these changes may be recorded as electrical
potentials or as changes in the resistance of the skin
to the passage of a minute current. We shall measure
the resistance between the electrodes placed on your
first and third fingers. The current passing through
will be recorded on electrical amplifying and recording
equipment- located in the next room. At the conclusion
of the experiment we will be happy to show you the
equipment and the type of record which is being made.
There are certain actions on your part that
might cause disturbances on the record. Therefore, your
cooperation in avoiding these actions will be appreciated.
Try not to move the hand on which the electrodes are
placed any more than is necessary to keep a comfortable
position. Do not flex the fingers excessively and parti
cularly do not push or change either the GSR or shock
electrodes in any way. Coughing and deep breathing
should also be avoided as much as possible. However,
there is no need for you to be uncomfortable— just
'relax.
INSTRUCTIONS # 2
I am g o in g t o f l a s h a l i g h t on th e s c r e e n
i n f r o n t o f y o u . J u s t pay a t t e n t i o n t o th e s c r e e n .
You can com m unicate w i t h me th ro u g h t h e m icrophone
n e x t t o you. P l e a s e f e e l f r e e t o make any comments
th r o u g h o u t th e e x p e r im e n t. T here w i l l be no shock
u n t i l you a re so in fo rm e d .
77
INSTRUCTIONS # 3
SETTING THE INTENSITY OP THE SHOCK
You w i l l r e c a l l t h a t i t was i n d i c a t e d t o you
t h a t a m ild e l e c t r i c sh o ck w ould be u se d i n t h i s e x p e r i
m en t. We would now l i k e t o e x p l a i n t o you the p u rp o s e o f
t h a t shock and t o p e r m it you t o s e t i t a t an i n t e n s i t y
a p p r o p r i a t e f o r you. T h is shock w i l l be d e l i v e r e d th r o u g h
t h e s m a ll e l e c t r o d e s a t t a c h e d t o y o u r r i g h t arm. I n j u s t
a moment we w i l l s e t th e a p p a r a t u s a t a v a lu e w here you
w i l l r e c e i v e a sho ck t h a t i s so s m a ll you can n o t f ^ e l i t .
Then we w i l l g r a d u a l l y i n c r e a s e i t s i n t e n s i t y u n t i l you
c an r e p o r t t h a t you f e e l s o m e th in g . We w i l l t h e n c o n tin u e
t o i n c r e a s e i t u n t i l you r e p o r t t h a t i t f e e l s " u n c o m f o rt- j
a b l e . " By " u n c o m f o r ta b le " we mean we would l i k e you to |
s e t y o u r sh ock a t a l e v e l t h a t i s j u s t s tr o n g enough f o r
you t o d i s l i k e i t .
The p u rp o se o f th e shock i s as f o llo w s : We w ish
t o s e c u r e a s t a n d a r d m ag n itu d e o f e l e c t r i c a l change
a g a i n s t w hich we can compare y o u r r e a c t i o n s to o t h e r
s t i m u l i d u r i n g t h e e x p e r im e n t. A s m a ll e l e c t r i c sh o ck i s
t h e m ost r e l i a b l e way t o p ro d u ce such a s t a n d a r d o f u n i
form s k i n c h an g e. I n o t h e r w o rd s, a l l p e o p le p ro d u c e
s k i n chan g es o f a b o u t th e same amount when th e y f e e l a '
s m a ll e l e c t r i c s h o c k . T h e r e f o r e , by u s i n g such a sh ock j
78
o c c a s i o n a l l y , we have a b a s i s f o r com paring y o u r e l e c t r i
c a l s k i n a c t i v i t y w ith t h a t o f o t h e r s .
We s h a l l now p r o c e e d t o s e t th e s t r e n g t h a t a
l e v e l w hich i s a p p r o p r i a t e f o r y o u . T e l l me a s soon as
you f e e l a n y th in g t h a t you t h i n k i s an e l e c t r i c a l sh ock
i n your arm.
INSTRUCTIONS § 4
As b e f o r e , you w i l l se e a f l a s h on th e
s c r e e n . Watch t h e s c r e e n — pay a t t e n t i o n t o th e
f l a s h . T here w i l l be no shock i n t h e e x p e rim e n t
u n t i l you a r e so in f o r m e d . Are t h e r e any q u e s t io n s
80
INSTRUCTIONS § 5
We a r e now re a d y t o b e g in th e m ain p a r t o f
t h e e x p e r im e n t. As you were t o l d e a r l i e r , you may now
e x p e c t shock from h e re on. Keep y ou r eye on th e
s c r e e n — pay a t t e n t i o n t o th e l i g h t . I w i l l n o t be
b a ck u n t i l th e e x p e rim e n t i s o v e r . However, you can
com m unicate w ith me th ro u g h th e m ic ro p h o n e. P le a s e
f e e l f r e e t o make any comments th r o u g h o u t th e e x p e r i
m en t. Are t h e r e any q u e s t io n s ?
APPENDIX B
QUESTIONNAIRE
81
82
QUESTIONNAIRE
Name Date
S u b je c t No. Group
You have now f i n i s h e d w ith t h e e x p e r im e n ta l p a r t o f th e
e x p e r im e n t. W e w ould now l i k e you t o w r i t e down th e an
sw ers t o some q u e s t i o n s . Check one a n sw er to th e f o l lo w
i n g q u e s t i o n s :
1 . E v a lu a te how th e sho ck f e l t t o you .
n o t a n n p y in g a n n o y in g ____ very a n n o y in g___
2 . T hroughout t h e e x p e rim e n t d id th e shock i n t e n s i t y seem
3. How o f t e n do you t h i n k you were sh o ck ed d u rin g t h e
e x p e rim e n t?
a l l t h e tim e 75$ o f tim e 50$ o f tim e 25$ o f tim e _
4. I f you d id n o t -answer " a l l th e tim e " t o Q u e s tio n 3>
when do you t h in k you were sh ocked t h e m ost?
same th ro u g h o u t f i r s t p a r t o f e x p e rim e n t___
j m id d le p a r t l a s t p a r t d o n 't know___
5 . Did you ev er r e c e i v e a sho ck when you d id n o t e x p e c t
t o :
s t a y th e same i n c r e a s e d e c re a s e
83
6 . I f you answ ered y e s > w hat p a r t o f th e e x p e rim e n t?
F i r s t p a r t M iddle p a r t L a s t p a r t D o n 't know____
7 . Did you e v e r n o t r e c e i v e a shock when you e x p e c te d
shock?
Yes No____
■8. I f you an sw ered y e s 3 w hat p a r t o f th e e x p e rim e n t?
F i r s t p a r t M iddle p a r t L a s t p a r t j D o n ' t know____
9 . Are t h e r e any f u r t h e r comments you want t o make a b o u t
t h e e x p e rim e n t?
APPENDIX C
TABLES
84
f o r
Summary
Groups
TABLE 1
o f GSR Mean M agnitudes
on E x t i n c t i o n T r i a l s 1-16
85
T r i a l R-50 R-100
Group
E-50
E-100 P-50 P-100
1
1 .7 3 1 .5 3 1 .4 7 1 .5 5 0 .5 4 0.28
2 1.52
1.1 9
1 .2 1 1 .1 8 .
3 1 .4 1 0 .7 5 0 .9 7
1 .2 2
4 1 .6 2 1 .1 4
0 .9 9
0 .9 2
5
1 .5 2 1 .0 4 0 .9 4 1.29
6 1 .4 0
0 .7 3
0 .9 2
0 .7 3
7 1 .3 9 0 .8 5 0 .6 7 1 .0 2 ..
8
1 .6 3 0 .6 5 0 .7 3
0.92
9
1 .3 2 0 .5 6
0 .7 1
1 .1 2
>
10 1 .6 1
0 .7 5 0 .9 0
0 .5 2
'
11 1 .2 5 0 .5 4
0 .7 7
0 .8 1
12
1 .5 3
0 .5 6 0.4 9 1 .0 5
*.
13 1 .3 3 0 .5 0 0 .7 6 0.60
14 1 .3 2
0 .5 5 0 .3 7 0.89
15 1.59 0 .6 8 0.5 9
0 .7 8 ■
16 1 .2 8
0 .5 5
0 .5 2
0 .9 3
.
I
TABLE 2
86*
f o r
Summary o f V a ria n c e s
Groups on E x t i n c t i o n T r i a l s 1-16
T r i a l
R-50 R-100
Group
E— 50
E-100 P-50 P-100
1
0 .5 7
0 .2 0 0 .2 6
0 .5 1 0.3 9 0 .2 7
2 1 .1 0 0 .2 1 o
.
-j
o
0 .5 5
3
1 .2 4
0 .3 3
0 .2 4 0 .4 1
■ ■ ■
4
1.5 9 0 .3 3
0 .5 0 0 .3 0
5
1 .4 0
C O
•
O
0 .7 0 0 .8 5
6 1.16 0 .4 6 ■ 0 .4 6 0 .3 8
7
1 .1 8 0 .4 2 0 .2 6 0 .5 2
8 1 .9 2 0 .4 4 0 .2 3 0 .8 8
9 0.8 9 0 .2 3 0 .3 3
0.60
•
10 1 .2 5 0 .4 1 0 .4 4 0 .4 6
11 0 .9 5 0 .3 5
0 .4 8 0 .3 5
-
-12
1 .7 3
0 .5 6 0 .2 8 0 .5 6
•
13 1.79
0 .4 2 0 .2 6
0 .5 3
14- 1 .4 7 0 .5 1
0 .3 8 0.62
15 1 .6 7 0 .4 2 . 0 .4 2
0 .6 3 '
16
1.19 0 .5 1 0 .3 6 0 .5 4
8?
TABLE 3
A n a ly s is o f V a ria n c e o f Response t o CS
on th e L a s t A d a p ta tio n T r i a l
Source SS d f M S F
Between g ro u p s .58
5
.12
.35
E r r o r
( w i t h i n g rou ps)
21 .9 7
66
.33
-
T o t a l
(2 2 .5 5 ) (71)
i
88
TABLE 4
A n a ly s is o f V a ria n c e o f CR’s
on t h e F i r s t E x t i n c t i o n T r i a l
S ou rce SS d f M S F
B etw een group s 22 .4 8
5
4.50
11 .2 5 *
E r r o r
( w i t h i n g ro u p s)
2 6 .3 6 66 .40
T o t a l (4 8 .8 4 )
(71)
*E < .01
TABLE 5
A n a ly s is o f V a ria n c e o f CR's
on 4 E x p e r im e n ta l Groups on 1 s t E x t i n c t i o n T r i a l
(R-5Q, R -100, E -5 0 , E-100)
S ou rce SS d f M S P
Betw een g ro u p s .44
3 .15 .35
E r r o r
( w i t h i n g ro u p s
18.5 4 44 .41
T o ta l (1 8 .9 8 ) (47)
9 0 -
TABLE 6
Summary o f t_ t e s t s Comparing E x p e r im e n ta l
v s . C o n tr o l Groups on 1 s t E x t i n c t i o n T r i a l
Com parison t d f P r o b a b i l i t y
R-50 v s . P-50 4 .0 3
22 < .0 0 1
R-100 v s . P-100 6 .0 7
22 < .0 0 1
E-50 v s . P-50 3* 84 22 < .0 0 1
E-100 v s . P-100 4.76 22 < .0 0 1
91
TABLE 7
A n a ly s is o f V a ria n c e o f CR’ s
o f R-50 and R-100 Ss on E x t i n c t i o n T r i a l s 2-16
S ource SS d f MS' ' P
Betw een s u b j e c t s (2 3 2 .2 5 ) (23)
R e in fo rc e m e n t (R) 45.79
1
45.79
5.4 0 *
E r r o r (b) 1 8 6 .4 6 22 8.48
W ith in s u b j e c t s (1 4 4 .0 5 ) (336)
T r i a l s (T)
8.4 3 14 .60 1 .4 0
R X T 3.10 14 .22
E r r o r (w) 1 3 2 .5 2 308
.43
T o ta l (3 7 6 .3 0 )
(359)
*E.
92
TABLE 8
A n a ly s is o f V a ria n c e o f CR’ s
o f R-50 and R-100 Ss on E x t i n c t i o n T r i a l s 2-6
S ource SS d f MS F
Between s u b j e c t s
(9 4 .7 7 ) (23)
R e in fo rc e m e n t (R)
8 .2 3
• 1 8 .2 3 2.09
E r r o r (b)
86.54
22
3 .9 3
W ith in s u b j e c t s
T r i a l s (T)
( 1 5 .5 8 )
2.16
(96)
4 .54 3 . 60*
R X T
.53
4
.13
E r r o r (w)
12 .8 9
88
.15
T o ta l
(1 1 0 .3 5 ) (119)
*£ = .01
93
TABLE 9
A n a ly s is o f V a ria n c e o f CR’ s
o f R-50 and R-■100 Ss on E x t i n c t i o n T r i a l s
7-11
S ou rce SS d f M S F
Betw een s u b j e c t s
C93.99) (23)
R e in fo rc e m e n t (R) 1 7 .8 4 1 17.84
5 .13*
E r r o r (b)
7 6 .1 5
22 3.46
W ith in s u b j e c t s ( 2 2 .5 0 ) (96)
T r i a l s (T)
1 .5 7
4
.39 1 .7 0
R X T .64 4 .16
E r r o r (w) 20 .2 9 88 .23
T o ta l
C H 6 .4 9 ) (119)
*£ < .05
94 .
• TABLE 10
A n a ly s is o f V a ria n c e o f CR's
o f R-50 and R-100 Ss on E x t i n c t i o n T r i a l s 12-16
S ou rce SS d f MS F
Betw een s u b j e c t s
(4 3 .2 9 ) (23)
R e in fo rc e m e n t (R) 21.42 1 2 1 .4 2 2 1.64 *
E r r o r (b)
21.87
22
.99
W ith in s u b j e c t s (1 0 2 .4 1 ) (96)
T r i a l s (T)
.93
4
.23
R X T .24 4 .06
E r r o r (w) 101.24 88
1 .1 5
T o ta l
(1 4 5 .7 0 ) (119)
< . 0 1
i
i
i
95
TABLE 11
Summary o f lb T e s t ( d f = 22) Comparing
R-50 and R-100 Ss on E x t i n c t i o n T r i a l s 2-16
T r i a l D i f f e r e n c e
b e tw e e n means
t P r o b a b i l i t y
2 .32 .93
3
..66
1 .7 6 < .05
4
CO
•
1.-14
5 ' .48 1 .1 4
6 .68
1 . 7 7 ' < .05
7
.54 1 .4 2
8 .98 2.12 .025
9
.76 2.38 < . 0 2 5 '
10 .86 2.21
< .025
11
.7 1
2.0 8 .025
12
.97 2 .1 3 < .025
13 .83
1.86 C .05
14 .78 1 .8 3 < . 0 5
15 .92 2.10
< . 0 2 5
16
.73 1 .8 5__________ < .05
96
TABLE 12
A n a ly s is o f V a ria n c e o f CR’s
o f E-50 and E-100 Ss on E x t i n c t i o n T r i a l s 2-16
S ource SS df M S P
Betw een s u b j e c t s ( 7 8 . 16 )
(2 3 )
R e in fo rc e m e n t (R) 2 .9 6 1 2.96
E r r o r (b) 75 .2 0 22 3.42
W ith in s u b j e c t s ( 111 , 44) (336)
T r i a l s (T)
9 .5 4
14 .68 2.19*
R X T
5 .0 5
14 .36 1.16
E r r o r (w) 9 6 . 85 308
.31
T o ta l ( 1 89 . 60 )
(359)
* £ = .01
97
TABLE 13
A n a ly s is o f V a ria n c e o f CR’s
o f E-50 and E-100 Ss on E x t i n c t i o n T r i a l s 2-6
S ource SS d f M S P
Betw een s u b j e c t s (3,8.18)
(23)
R e in fo rc e m e n t (R) . .12 1 .12
E r r o r (b) 38.06 22 • 1 .5 0
W ith in s u b j e c t s ( 2 6 .1 7 ) (96)
T r i a l s (T) 2 .0 5 4
• 51
1.96
R X T 1 .0 1 4 .25
E r r o r (w)
23 .1 1 88 .26
T o ta l ( 6 4 .3 5 ) (119)
i
98
TABLE 14
A n a ly s is o f V a ria n c e o f CR’ s
o f E-50 and E-100 Ss on E x t i n c t i o n T r i a l s 7-11
Source SS d f MS P
Betw een s u b j e c t s (2 9 .9 5 ) (23)
R e in fo rc e m e n t (R) .94 1 .94
E r r o r (b) 29.01 22 1 .3 2
W ith in s u b j e c t s (2 7 .9 6 ) (96)
T r i a l s (T) .20 4
.05
R X T 1 .1 1 4 .28
E r r o r (w) 226.65 88 .30
T o t a l
(5 7 .9 1 ) (119)
99
TABLE 15
A n a ly s is o f V a ria n c e o f CR's
o f E-50 and E-100 Ss on E x t i n c t i o n T r i a l s 12-16
S ource SS d f M S F
Betw een s u b j e c t s (4 3 .3 3 ) (23)
R e in fo rc e m e n t (R)
2.7 3
1
2 .7 3
1 .9 6
E r r o r ( b ) 40.60 22
1 .3 9
W ith in s u b j e c t s ( 1 6 . 88 ) (96)
T r i a l s (T) .26 4
.07
R X T 2.10 4
.5 3
3 .1 2 *
E r r o r (w) 14.52 88
.17 '
T o ta l ( 6 0 . 21 )
(119)
*E < *05
100
TABLE 16
A n a ly s is o f V a ria n c e o f CR's
o f R -100, E -5 0 , and E-100 Ss on E x t i n c t i o n T r i a l s 2-16
S ource SS d f M S P
Between s u b j e c t s (1 2 5 .2 1 )
(35)
R e in fo rc e m e n t (R) 4 .7 8 2
2.39
--------
E r r o r (b)
1 2 0 .4 3 33 3.65
W ith in s u b j e c t s (1 4 7 .6 0 ) (504)
T r i a l s (T)
15.89
• 14 1 .1 4
4 .2 2 *
R X T 7.29 28 .26
E r r o r (w) ‘ 1 24 .42 462
.27
T o ta l (2 7 2 .8 1 )
(539)
*2. < .01
i
TABLE 17
Summary o f Ss R esp onses on Q u e s tio n n a ir e
v
Q u e stio n R-50 R-100
Grout:
E-50
i
E-100 P-50 P-100
1. How sh ock
f e l t
8 A
3 n o t A
1 v e ry A
8 A
3 n o t A
1 v e ry A
7 A
2 n o t A
3 v e ry A
8A
2 n o t a
2 v e ry A
9 A
3 n o t A
7 A
3 n o t A
2 v e ry A
2. I n t e n s i t y
shock
8 "same
3 i n c .
1 d e c .
6 same
5 i n c .
1 d e c .
3 same
8 i n c .
1 de c .
2 same
9 i n c .
1 d e c .
5 same
6 i n c .
1 d e c ..
4 same
4 i n c .
4 d e c .
3. F requency
shock
8
2
2
25%
50%
15%
2
6
4
25%
50%.
15%
2 25%
5 50%
5 15%
5
2
2
2
25%
50%
15%
100 %
11 25%5
1 50%
11 25%%
1 50%
4. When
5
1 s t p . 1 same 1 same 4 same 6 1 s t p . 9 1 s t p .
shocked
7
m id dle
7
l a s t p . 5 1 s t p .
3
1 s t p . 6 m id d le 3 m iddle
most
3
m id d le 1 m iddle 2 l a s t
1
9
5 l a s t 1
?
5. Shock when 6 yes
3
yes 12 yes 8 yes 10 yes 11 yes
n o t ex 6 no
9
no 4 no 2 no 1 no
p e c te d
6. When ( r e 2 1 s t p .
3
1 s t p . 6 m id d le 2 m id d le 3 1 s t p . 4 1 s t p .
5
1 m iddle 4 l a s t 6 l a s t 6 m id d le 4 m id d le
TABLE 17
( c o n tin u e d )
Q u e stio n R-50 R-100 E-50 E-100 P -5 ‘ 0 I>-100
6 . ( c o n t i n 1 1 s t ..&-.mid 2 1 s t & mid 1 ? 1 1 s t & mid
ued) 2 ? 2
■ ?...............
7. Not shock 12 yes 12 y es 11 yes
9
yes . 10 yes
9
yes
ed when 1 no
3
no 2 no
3
no
e x p e c te d
8. When 1 1 s t p . 8 m id d le 5 1 s t p . 6 m id d le 1 m id d le 1 1 s t p .
( r e 7) 3 m id d le 4 l a s t 2 m id d le
3
l a s t p . 9 l a s t p . 2 m id d le
7 l a s t p . 1 l a s t p . 6 l a s t
1 ? 3 1 s t & mid •
!
102

Asset Metadata

Creator Fiebiger, Josephine Beatrice (author)

Core Title The Effect Of Discriminability On The Partial Reinforcement Effect In Human Gsr Conditioning

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Program Psychology

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag oai:digitallibrary.usc.edu:usctheses,OAI-PMH Harvest,psychology, experimental

Language English

Advisor Grings, William W. (committee chair), Cliff, Norman (committee member), Holmes, John Eric (committee member), Slucki, Henry (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c18-633579

Unique identifier UC11361316

Identifier 6900610.pdf (filename),usctheses-c18-633579 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 6900610.pdf

Dmrecord 633579

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Fiebiger, Josephine Beatrice

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA