Abstract
Electrodermal lability has been shown to be correlated with a measure of perceptual sensitivity. The relationship between lability and those processes subserving attention and vigilance was investigated within a conditioning paradigm as contrasted with a “truly random” control procedure. Male undergraduate subjects received either tones paired with shocks (conditioning group) or a truly random control procedure in which tones and shocks were programmed completely independently and randomly. An analysis of variance of adjusted results revealed main effects of lability and experimental group and no significant interactions. An erratic response curve provided no support for a phenomenon of increasing habit strength. The failure to demonstrate conditioning was considered in light of recent literature.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Reference Notes
Sostek, A. J., Katkin, E. S., & Sostek, A. M. Signal detection as a function of electrodermal lability and differential payoffs. Paper presented at meetings of the Society for Psychophysiological Research, Boston, November 1972.
Burstein, K. R. GSR conditioning: A reexamination. Unpublished manuscript, 1979.
Reference
Brewer, W. F. There is no convincing evidence for operant or classical conditioning in adult humans. In W. B. Weimer & D. S. Palermo (Eds.), Cognition and the symbolic processes. Hillsdale, N.J: Erlbaum, 1974. (Distributed by Wiley.)
Burch, N. R., & Greiner, T. H. A bioelectric scale of human alertness: Concurrent recordings of the EEG and GSR. Psychiatric Research Reports, 1960, 12, 183–193.
Burstein, K. R., & Smith, B. D. The latency distribution of the skin conductance response as a function of the CS-UCS interval. Psychophysiology, 1972, 9, 14–20.
Crider, A., & Lunn, R. Electrodermal lability as a personality dimension. Journal of Experimental Research in Personality, 1971, 5, 145–150.
Crider, A., & Tursky, B. Relationship of electrodermal lability and reflex sensitivty to differential conditioning. Psychonomic Science, 1967, 9, 225–226.
Hastrup, J. Electrodermal lability, introversion, and perceptual sensitivity. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, State University of New York at Buffalo, Department of Psychology, 1977.
Hastrup, J. L., & Katkin, E. S. Electrodermal lability: An attempt to measure its psychological correlates. Psychophysiology, 1916, 13, 296–301.
Katkin, E. S. Relationship between manifest anxiety and two indices of autonomic response to stress. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1965, 2, 324–333.
Katkin, E. S. The relationship between a measure of transitory anxiety and spontaneous autonomic activity. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 1966, 71, 142–146.
Katkin, E. S. Electrodermal lability: A psychophysiological analysis of individual differences in response to stress. In I. G. Sarason & C. D. Spielberger (Eds.), Stress and anxiety (Vol. 2). Washington, D. C: Hemisphere, 1975.
Lader, M. H. Arousal measures and the classification of affective disorders. In M. L. Kietzman, S. Sutton, & E. J. Zubin (Eds.), Experimental approaches to psychopathology. New York: Academic Press, 1975.
Lader, M. H., & Wing, L. Habituation of the psychogalvanic reflex in patients with anxiety states and in normal subjects. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry, 1964, 27, 210–218.
Martin, I. Delayed GSR conditioning and effect of electrode placement on measurements of skin resistance. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 1963, 7, 15–22.
McDonald, D. G., & Johnson, L. C. A reanalysis of GSR conditioning. Psychophysiology, 1965, 1, 291–295.
Ohman, A., & Bohlin, G. The relationship between spontaneous and stimulus-correlated electrodermal responses in simple and discriminative conditioning paradigms. Psychophysiology, 1973, 10, 589–600.
Prokasy, W. F., & Ebel, H. C. Three components of the classically conditioned GSR in human subjects. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1967, 73, 247–256.
Prokasy, W. F., & Kumpfer, K. L. Classical conditioning. In W. F. Prokasy & D. C. Raskin(Eds.), Electrodermal activity in psychological research. New York: Academic Press, 1973.
Purohit, A. P. Personality variables, sex-difference, GSR responsiveness, and GSR conditioning. Journal of Experimental Research in Personality, 1966, 1, 166–173.
Rescorla, R. Pavlovian conditioning and its proper control procedures. Psychological Review, 1967, 74, 71–80.
Silverman, A. J., Cohen, S. I., & Shmavonian, B. M. Investigation of psychophysiologic relationships with skin resistance measures. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 1959, 4, 65–87.
Stern, M. A., Stewart, J. A., & Winokur, G. An investigation of some relationships between various measures of galvanic skin response. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 1961, 5, 215–223.
Stern, J. A., Winokur, G., Stewart, M. A., & Leonard, C. Electrodermal conditioning: Some further correlates. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 1963, 137, 479–486.
Stewart, M. A., Stern, J. A., Winokur, G., & Fredman, S. An analysis of GSR conditioning. Psychological Review, 1961, 68, 60–67.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This paper was presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Psychophysiological Research, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 1977. The authors gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Gary Santoro.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Solanto, M.V., Katkin, E.S. Classical EDR conditioning using a truly random control and subjects differing in electrodermal lability level. Bull. Psychon. Soc. 14, 49–52 (1979). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03329397
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03329397