Literature DB >> 21287073

Skin conductance response conditioning with CS intensities equal to and greater than UCS intensity.

W F Prokasy1, W C Williams, C G Clark.   

Abstract

With .2-sec bursts of white noise as both conditioned stimulus (CS) and unconditioned stimulus (UCS), conditioning of first-interval skin conductance responses was obtained when the intensity of the CS equaled and exceeded that of the UCS. There was no evidence that second-interval response conditioning occurred. Nonspecific response frequencies were also affected by the variations in stimulus intensity, this raising some question about typical controls employed in SCR conditioning. There was some evidence that second interval responses were suppressed by the intense CS values. It was concluded that the existence of simple conditioning with a CS/UCS intensity ratio equal to or greater than unity was contrary to the Pavlovian proposition that a CS must be biologically less salient than the UCS in order for conditioning to occur. It was noted, however, that the suppression of second-interval responses might indicate that anticipatory CRs which are not confounded with orienting reflexes are prevented from exhibiting a conditioning effect when a high CS/UCS intensity ratio is employed.

Entities:  

Year:  1975        PMID: 21287073     DOI: 10.3758/BF03212911

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mem Cognit        ISSN: 0090-502X


  7 in total

1.  The dominance-contiguity theory of the acquisition of classical conditioning.

Authors:  G RAZRAN
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1957-01       Impact factor: 17.737

2.  A note on stimulus intensity dynamism. V.

Authors:  F A LOGAN
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1954-01       Impact factor: 8.934

3.  The relation between conditioned stimulus intensity and response strength.

Authors:  C C PERKINS
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1953-10

4.  Stimulus intensity dynamism (V) and stimulus generalization.

Authors:  C L HULL
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1949-03       Impact factor: 8.934

5.  Effects of trace versus delay conditioning, interstimulus interval variability, and instructions on UCR diminution.

Authors:  W W Grings; A M Schell
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1971-09

6.  Learning and performance as a function of CS-intensity in a delayed GSR conditioning situation.

Authors:  J F Orlebeke; E H van Olst
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1968-07

7.  Orienting responses and GSR conditioning: a dilemma.

Authors:  P Badia; R H Defran
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1970-05       Impact factor: 8.934

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.