Galvanic skin response-orienting reflex and semantic conditioning and generalization with different unconditioned stimuli.

Abstract

There were 280 college students who served in a semantic conditioning and generalization experiment where galvanic skin response (GSR) and cephalic vasomotor response measures were obtained as well as semantic differential ratings of the control words and the critical conditioned stimulus (CS) and generalization test words. Different groups of students received either 110-dB white noise, 95-dB white noise, 80-dB white noise, a 110-dB tone, or an 80-db tone as the unconditioned stimulus (UCS) during conditioning.An initial habituation series of 15 neutral words was presented. This was followed by semantic conditioning, which consisted of 10 presentations of the word PLANT followed in 10 sec by a UCS. Different unrelated filler words were interspersed among the conditioning trials. A semantic generalization test followed in which different groups received five unreinforced presentations of either TREE or STEM, which were associates of the CS word, or MUSIC, a word unrelated to the CS or other generalization test words.Differential semantic conditioning and generalization were manifested in the GSR index of the orienting reflex and semantic differential ratings. Both measures varied with the UCS condition. In terms of both the GSR and semantic differential ratings, conditioning and generalization were apparent only in students who could verbalize the appropriate stimulus contingencies.The extinction test of generalization indicated that reliable differential generalization occurred to all three test words, the unrelated word MUSIC as well as the two associates PLANT and STEM. What is more, differential semantic generalization of the GSR increased over the five test trials.

Selective orienting and habituation of the GSR as a consequence of overt and covert activity

“…The significant effect yielded by OR level is not surprising. This between-subjects effect is repeatedly obtained (e.g., Maltzman, Langdon, Pendery, & Wolff, 1977), especially in habituation where the selection of high-and low-OR groups is made on the basis of their response to the first word in habituation. But another characteristic of the GSR-OR, the absence of an initial difference among the various groups, is of considerable interest.…”

Fear Generalization in Humans: Systematic Review and Implications for Anxiety Disorder Research

“…For instance, participants would be conditioned to a word (e.g., PLANT) by pairing the presentation of the word with a US, and then tested on semantically related words (e.g., STEM) or unrelated words (e.g., MUSIC) (Maltzman, Langdon, Pendery, & Wolff, 1977). In some cases, the conditioned SCR would generalize between semantically related, but not unrelated word pairs; but the results from semantic conditioning experiments tended to be noisy and were often observed only in subjects who could verbalize the experimental contingencies (see Maltzman et al, 1977). Much of the theoretical interest in semantic conditioning and generalization concerned the acquisition of language, and few contemporary studies of human fear conditioning incorporate purely semantic stimuli.…”

Latent inhibition of the GSR conditioned to words

“…We had hoped thereby to examine the effects of different amounts of preconditioning habituation of the OR indexed by cephalic vasodilation on the acquisition of a conditioned defensive reflex indexed by cephalic vasoconstriction (Sokolov, 1963) as well as the GSR measure of the OR. Since we failed to obtain reliable evidence of cephalic vasomotor conditioning in this as well as other experiments performed in this laboratory (Maltzman, Langdon, Pendery, & Wolff, 1977;Maltzman, Weissbluth, & Wolff, 1978), we will not discuss these vasomotor measures further.…”

“…Our interpretation is that the usual GSR conditioning in normal adults is a form of conditioning of the OR, a form of conditioned attention Pendery & Maltzman, 1977). However, there are different forms of the OR.…”