Differential Gsr Conditioning Accompanied by a Two-Light Prediction Task

Summary

The tenability of Spence's “inhibitory set” concept to account for differential galvanic skin responding (GSR) was explored by embedding differential conditioning trials within a two-light prediction, indication, or observation task. The masking of the tone (conditioned stimulus, CS)/shock (unconditioned stimulus, UCS) relationship was expected to result in reduced differential responding (DR) with the reduced DR attributable to a failure by S to inhibit the response to the negative stimulus. Differential conditioning trials embedded in four task conditions [predicting (P), verbally indicating (I), or visually observing (O) a two-light pattern, and conditioning alone with no lights presented (CA)] were factorially combined with two different light patterns. Thirty-six Ss were run in each of the eight groups.

The DR was reduced when either the P or O task was involved. The response to the positive stimulus was significantly smaller for the P group as compared to the CA group. However, the response to the negative stimulus was not significantly larger for any of the two-light conditions compared to the CA group. The proportion of Ss in each group aware of the relationship among the tones and shock as indicated by a postconditioning questionnaire increased from .30, .43, .51, to .80 for the P, I, O, and CA conditions, respectively. The data are not explainable by the concept of inhibitory set, alone; a consideration of cognitive processes seems necessary. An information processing approach is suggested.