University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

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

(USC Thesis Other)

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

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

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

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Human Gsr Classical Conditioning And Awareness Of The Cs-Ucs Relation

PDF

The Effects Of Reinforcement Pattern, Intertrial Interval Regularity, And adaptation On The Orienting Response And Classical Gsr Discrimination Conditioning

PDF

Classical Discrimination Conditioning As A Function Of Probability Of Reinforcement

PDF

Weight Reduction As A Function Of The Timing Of Reinforcement In A Covertaversive Conditioning Paradigm

PDF

Effects Of Different Treatment Procedures On Reading Ability And Anxiety Level In Children With Learning Difficulties

PDF

The Modification Of Partial Reinforcement Effect As A Consequence Of Electrical Stimulation Of The Caudate Nucleus In Cats

PDF

Some Factors Affecting Ucr Diminution

PDF

Differences Between Cues In Effectiveness As Retrieval Aids

PDF

The Effect Of Conditions Of Risk, Internal Versus External Control Of Reinforcement, And Sex On Binary Choice Probability Learning

PDF

Human Operant Eye Blink Conditioning, Awareness, And The Extraversion-Introversion Dimension Of Personality

PDF

The Effect Of Subject Sophistication On Ratio And Discrimination Scales

PDF

The Effects Of Transverse Accelerations And Exponential Time-Lag Constants On Compensatory Tracking Performance

PDF

The Effects Of Ether And Electroconvulsive Shock On One Trial Appetitive And Adversive Learning

PDF

Monocular Acquisition And Interocular Transfer Of Two Types Of Discriminations In Normal And Corpus Callosally-Sectioned Guinea Pigs

PDF

Autonomic and cognitive indices of semantic conditioning and generalization

PDF

The Influence Of The Achievement Motive, The Affiliation Motive, And Incentive Conditions On Roleplaying Ability In Children

PDF

Figural And Symbolic Divergent-Production Abilities In Adults And Adolescents

PDF

An Effect Of Verbal Conditioning On Nonverbal Behavior

PDF

Effects Of Task Performance Upon The Acoustic Reflex

PDF

The Effect Of Motor Ability Loss On Cognition And Emotion

Asset Metadata

Creator Fiebiger, Josephine Beatrice (author)

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

Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Program Psychology

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

Tag OAI-PMH Harvest,psychology, experimental

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

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