A Comparative Study of Involuntary and Voluntary Conditioned Responses

A study of voluntary and involuntary finger conditioning.

“…It is significant that, for both of our voluntary groups, there is a trend toward an increasing number of conditioned responses with increased training. This is in marked contrast to the findings of Marquis and Porter, who found no increase in voluntary conditioned wink reactions, and to those of Yacorzynski and Guthrie (11), who, using voluntary hand withdrawal to a shock on the other hand, found an actual decrease in the number of voluntary conditioned responses. One possible explanation of this may lie in the fact that these experimenters used approximately only a third as many stimulations per sitting as was used in the present experiment.…”

A comparison of eyelid responses conditioned with reflex and voluntary reinforcement in normal individuals and in psychiatric patients.

“…Are we justified in speaking of voluntary conditioning at all? The evidence of this study and of other investigations [Wickens (15), Peak (9), Stephens (14), Yacorzynski and Guthrie (16), Marquis and Porter (7)3 support the existence of such a distinction. If we agree with Marquis and Porter (7) that the conditioning situation be defined as the repeated presentation of an indifferent stimulus in a definite temporal sequence with a stimulus which naturally evokes a response, then the conditioned response may be defined as that response which in time comes to be elicited by the indifferent stimulus alone.…”

The relation of drive to finger-withdrawal conditioning.

“…The relation of drive to a variety of responses should be investigated. There is experimental evidence that a distinction between voluntary and involuntary fingerwithdrawal responses is not impossible (Moyer & Lindley, 1961;Wickens, 1939;Yacorzynski & Guthrie, 1937). Development of valid criteria for making this distinction may be requisite to a clearer determination of drive effect on fingerwithdrawal conditioning.…”