Abstract
Three experiments on classical differential conditioning of the human skin conductance response to elemental and compound stimuli are reported. Subjects in Experiment 1 received both positive and negative patterning training, followed by either positive or negative patterning transfer tests on new stimuli. In positive patterning, a compound of two stimuli is reinforced and its elements are nonreinforced. In negative patterning, the elements are reinforced and the compound is nonreinforced. Subjects in Experiments 2 and 3 received either positive or negative patterning during training, followed by transfer tests on new stimuli. In Experiment 2, the transfer series began with new elements, after which their compound was presented; in Experiment 3, the new compound was presented first in the transfer series, and then the separate elements were administered. All three experiments provided evidence of the acquisition of positive patterning, while negative patterning was found only in Experiments 2 and 3. Positive patterning transferred to new stimuli, indicating that it was not attributable solely to summation of sub-threshold excitation conditioned to the elements on reinforced compound trials. This finding, coupled with the negative patterning found in Experiments 2 and 3, provided support for the unique cue hypothesis. It was concluded that the assumed unique cue constituted a learned “rule,” and that the actual elemental stimuli were neither perceptually nor otherwise modified during the conditioning process.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bellingham, W. P. Gillette-Bellingham, K. &Kehoe, E. J. (1985). Summation and configuration in patterning schedules with the rat and rabbit.Animal Learning & Behavior,13, 152–164.
Greenhouse, S. W. &Geisser, S. (1959). On methods in the analysis of profile data.Psychometrika,24, 95–112.
Kehoe, E. J., &Gormezano, I. (1980). Configuration and combination laws in conditioning with compound stimuli.Psychological Bulletin,87, 351–378.
Kimmel, H. D. King, J. Hudy, J. J. &Gardner, K. A. (1980). A mutual inductance shocker.Behavior Research Methods & Instrumentation,12, 605–606.
Lykken, D. T., &Venables, P. H. (1971). Direct measurement of skin conductance: A proposal for standardization.Psychophysiology,8, 656–672.
Mackintosh, N. J. (1975). A theory of attention: Variation in the associability of stimuli with reinforcement.Psychological Review,82, 276–298.
Pearce, J. M. (1987). A model of stimulus generalization for Pavlovian conditioning.Psychological Review,94, 61–73.
Pearce, J. M., &Hall, G. (1980). A model for Pavlovian conditioning: Variations in the effectiveness of conditioned but not of unconditioned stimuli.Psychological Review,7, 532–552.
Pearce, J. M. &Wilson, P. N. (1990). Configurai associations in discrimination learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,16, 250–261.
Rescorla, R. A. (1972). “Configurai” conditioning in discrete-trial bar-pressing.Journal of Comparative & Physiological Psychology,79, 307–317.
Rescorla, R. A. (1973). Evidence for a unique-cue account of configurai conditioning.Journal of Comparative & Physiological Psychology,85, 331–338.
Rescorla, R. A. Grau, J. W., &Durlach, P. J. (1985). Analysis of the unique cue in configurai discriminations.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,11, 356–366.
Rescorla, R. A., &Wagner, A. R. (1972). A theory of Pavlovian conditioning: Variations in the effectiveness of reinforcement and non-reinforcement. In A. Black & W. F. Prokasy (Eds.),Classical conditioning II (pp. 64–99). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Saavedra, M. A. (1975). Pavlovian compound conditioning in the rabbit.Learning & Motivation,6, 314–326.
Venables, P. H., &Christie, M. J. (1980). Electrodermal activity. In I. Martin & P. H. Venables (Eds.),Techniques in psychophysiology (pp. 4–67). Chichester, U.K.: Wiley.
Whitlow, J. W., &Wagner, A. R. (1972). Negative patterning in classical conditioning: Summation of response tendencies to isolabte and configurai components.Psychonomic Science,27, 299–301.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Our thanks are extended to Helmut Kleinschmitt, Regina Rettenbach, and Jörg Wolter for assistance in conducting the experiment. We also thank V.M. LoLordo and two anonymous reviewers for valuable commentary and criticism.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lachnit, H., Kimmel, H.D. Positive and negative patterning in human classical skin conductance response conditioning. Animal Learning & Behavior 21, 314–326 (1993). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197997
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197997