On the criteria for instrumental autonomic conditioning

A reply to Katkin and Murray

Andrew Crider, Gary E Schwartz, Susan Shnidman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

21 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In their recent review of instrumental conditioning of autonomic functions, E. S. Katkin and E. N. Murray (see 42: criticized most of the existing studies on the human level as artifactual on 1 or more grounds. The criteria they employed for rejecting these demonstrations are themselves open to criticism, however. Specifically, it is argued that (1) peripheral or cognitive mediation hypotheses are unlikely alternative explanations of the obtained results; (2) an increase in response frequency over a preconditioning operant level is not a necessary condition for demonstrating an increase in response probability with contingent reinforcement; and (3) yoked-control designs, frequently used in this research, do not automatically invalidate experiments in which they are employed. It is concluded that the strongest hypothesis to account for the existing data remains the direct instrumental strengthening of autonomic activity. (35 ref.) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved).

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)455-461
Number of pages7
JournalPsychological Bulletin
Volume71
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 1969
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Research
Conditioning
Contingent
Mediation
Criticism
Reinforcement
Strengthening
Experiment

Keywords

  • instrumental autonomic conditioning, reply

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychology(all)
  • History and Philosophy of Science

Cite this

On the criteria for instrumental autonomic conditioning : A reply to Katkin and Murray. / Crider, Andrew; Schwartz, Gary E; Shnidman, Susan.

In: Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 71, No. 6, 06.1969, p. 455-461.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{fbe81283cda54342957ff3b53daf2355,
title = "On the criteria for instrumental autonomic conditioning: A reply to Katkin and Murray",
abstract = "In their recent review of instrumental conditioning of autonomic functions, E. S. Katkin and E. N. Murray (see 42: criticized most of the existing studies on the human level as artifactual on 1 or more grounds. The criteria they employed for rejecting these demonstrations are themselves open to criticism, however. Specifically, it is argued that (1) peripheral or cognitive mediation hypotheses are unlikely alternative explanations of the obtained results; (2) an increase in response frequency over a preconditioning operant level is not a necessary condition for demonstrating an increase in response probability with contingent reinforcement; and (3) yoked-control designs, frequently used in this research, do not automatically invalidate experiments in which they are employed. It is concluded that the strongest hypothesis to account for the existing data remains the direct instrumental strengthening of autonomic activity. (35 ref.) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved).",
keywords = "instrumental autonomic conditioning, reply",
author = "Andrew Crider and Schwartz, {Gary E} and Susan Shnidman",
year = "1969",
month = "6",
doi = "10.1037/h0027251",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "71",
pages = "455--461",
journal = "Psychological Bulletin",
issn = "0033-2909",
publisher = "American Psychological Association Inc.",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - On the criteria for instrumental autonomic conditioning

T2 - A reply to Katkin and Murray

AU - Crider, Andrew

AU - Schwartz, Gary E

AU - Shnidman, Susan

PY - 1969/6

Y1 - 1969/6

N2 - In their recent review of instrumental conditioning of autonomic functions, E. S. Katkin and E. N. Murray (see 42: criticized most of the existing studies on the human level as artifactual on 1 or more grounds. The criteria they employed for rejecting these demonstrations are themselves open to criticism, however. Specifically, it is argued that (1) peripheral or cognitive mediation hypotheses are unlikely alternative explanations of the obtained results; (2) an increase in response frequency over a preconditioning operant level is not a necessary condition for demonstrating an increase in response probability with contingent reinforcement; and (3) yoked-control designs, frequently used in this research, do not automatically invalidate experiments in which they are employed. It is concluded that the strongest hypothesis to account for the existing data remains the direct instrumental strengthening of autonomic activity. (35 ref.) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved).

AB - In their recent review of instrumental conditioning of autonomic functions, E. S. Katkin and E. N. Murray (see 42: criticized most of the existing studies on the human level as artifactual on 1 or more grounds. The criteria they employed for rejecting these demonstrations are themselves open to criticism, however. Specifically, it is argued that (1) peripheral or cognitive mediation hypotheses are unlikely alternative explanations of the obtained results; (2) an increase in response frequency over a preconditioning operant level is not a necessary condition for demonstrating an increase in response probability with contingent reinforcement; and (3) yoked-control designs, frequently used in this research, do not automatically invalidate experiments in which they are employed. It is concluded that the strongest hypothesis to account for the existing data remains the direct instrumental strengthening of autonomic activity. (35 ref.) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved).

KW - instrumental autonomic conditioning, reply

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=58149415754&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=58149415754&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1037/h0027251

DO - 10.1037/h0027251

M3 - Article

VL - 71

SP - 455

EP - 461

JO - Psychological Bulletin

JF - Psychological Bulletin

SN - 0033-2909

IS - 6

ER -