GSR Conditioning
An Illustration of Useless Distinctions between “Types” of Conditioning
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 13659378 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Harold W Coppock (Arizona State University, corresponding author), Randall M Chambers |
| Year | 1959 |
| Volume | 5 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 171-177 |
| Publication date | 1959-03-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Psychological Reports (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0033-2941 • E-ISSN: 1558-691X |
| Publisher | SAGE Publishing (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.2466/pr0.1959.5.g.171 |
| OpenAlex | W2081761771 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 14 |
A recently popular behavior theory attempted to dissolve distinctions between classical and instrumental conditioning by assuming that reward or need reduction--or presentation of a stimulus associated therewith-is necessary for classical as well as instrumental conditioning (14). Conditioned reflex experiments are said to be consistent with the hypothesis of need reduction because of the duration of the shock usual in such experiments; the onset and termination of the need occur so close together that it is difficult clearly to distinguish the influence of [onset from the influence of termination] (14, p. 82 ) . Examples of brief duration of shock include the .3-sec. ( 16) and .2-secl durations employed in previous tests of the importance of shock termination (escape) in conditioning. Separation of shock onset from shock termination has been effected by employing alternating current and letting it continue for at least 5 sec. The GSR has been conditioned in spite of the delayed reward (2 ) . This conclusion has been partially confirmed in a study in which the drive stimulation was acoustic and varied systematically between .l- and 4.0-sec. duration (21). However, there was no control for initial group differences, which were large. Most recently, experiment has been reported which used a drive stimulus of shock, and controlled for level of response to the CS prior to the conditioning trials. No significant differences were reported between the amount of conditioning when shock duration was .5 sec. and when it was 3.0 sec. ( 1 ) . No quantitative evidence was presented, however, as to what extent the similarity in amplitude of response to the CS might be due to (a) absence of conditioning or (b) presence of stimulus generalization (each S served in two treatments, in each of which a light of one intensity was associated with one duration of shock). Any effects of delay of reward upon rate of conditioning were expected to be more clearly demonstrable in the present experiment which was designed to control for individual differences in responsiveness, eliminate stimulus generalization, and also to provide for a statistical evaluation of the occurrence of conditioning. In addition to providing a treatment in which the reward was closely associated, and one in which the reward was remotely associated with the GSR, additional experimental treatment was utilized in which the reward occurred prior to this response. Delay of reward is typically taken as the delay after a response or an effector activity (14, 15). There seems to have been
Cognitive psychology · Conditioning · Statistics · Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes · Behavioral and Psychological Studies · Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development · Mathematics · Psychology
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |