On the criteria for instrumental autonomic conditioning: A reply to Katkin and Murray.

Crider, Andrew; Schwartz, Gary E.; Shnidman, Susan R.

doi:10.1037/h0027251

Cited by 46 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Taking into account that this habituation means a changing base line of HR with trials, the Groups x Trial blocks interaction would indicate rather that the responsecontingency has an effect. This argument is suggested by Crider, Schwartz and Shnidman (1969). In addition, similar results have been reported in the rewarding situation by Shapiro, Tursky and Schwartz (1970).…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 78%

Avoidance Conditioning of Autonomic Responses in Man

Okita

1971

Jpn. Psychol. Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 78%

Avoidance Conditioning of Autonomic Responses in Man

Okita

1971

Jpn. Psychol. Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Alternative explanations offered to account for instrumental changes in visceral function, such as autonomic arousal, cognitive mediation, or differential habituation to stimuli and reinforcers, are unnecessary (9,10). The specificity demonstrated in this paper suggests that operant modifications of one autonomic response need not require or result in an overall change in autonomic arousal.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 57%

Differentiation of Heart Rate and Systolic Blood Pressure in Man by Operant Conditioning

Shapiro

Tursky

Schwartz

1970

Psychosomatic Medicine

Self Cite

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human heart rate-systolic blood pressure decoupling was tested by operant conditioning procedures. Twenty normal male subjects were given feedback of their heart rate, half operantly reinforced for increasing and half for decreasing their heart rate, while systolic blood pressure was continuously monitored. Significant heart rate conditioning was obtained in a single session without concomitant effects on blood pressure. Further analyses of the best conditioners in the present study and those in a previous blood pressure conditioning study indicate the strength of operant heart rate-blood pressure decoupling and demonstrate that instrumental fractionation of closely related visceral behavior is possible in man.Recent research has shown that systolic blood pressure can be modified in man (1) and in rats paralyzed by curare (2) through technics of operant conditioning. These studies have demonstrated that learned changes in pressure are not associated with corresponding variations in heart rate, a closely related cardiovascular function. Considering traditional views that the autonomic nervous system functions in an

show abstract

“…These procedures were adopted in an effort to preclude mediation of visceral responding by somatomotor and respiratory concomitants because it was accepted that one could not speak meaningfully of autonomic learning unless performance mechanisms of this nature were ruled out Miller & Brucker, 1979). Although these practices appear to have achieved the desired effect (see Crider, Schwartz, & Shnidman, 1969), in so doing it is possible that compi-lation of a memory for response events related to feedback (operant response learning) was eliminated as well. Unfortunately the issue cannot be decided because performance demands that might have revealed a memory for the response were omitted in this early research.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Awareness of the response after feedback training for changes in heart rate and sudomotor laterality.

Roberts¹,

Williams²,

Marlin³

et al. 1984

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What is the relation between the ability to control visceral responding on a biofeedback task and the ability to report behaviors actually contributing to this performance? Subjects received biofeedback training for unidentified visceral responses and then gave written reports about what they had done to control the feedback displays. Independent judges were given these reports and, on the basis of knowledge about activities known to contribute to visceral activity, were asked to determine the visceral responses for which the subjects had been trained. The reports of subjects who succeeded at bidirectional control of heart rate (Experiment 1) or sudomotor laterality (Experiment 2) showed awareness of behaviors related to feedback as assessed by this procedure, whereas the reports of subjects who failed at bidirectional control did not. Subsequent experiments indicated that these results did not depend on a learning strategy that might have been specific to the initial studies. These findings call into question the view that people are unaware of what they have done to produce the response after training on biofeedback tasks. Earlier studies reporting lack of awareness in biofeedback are discussed in light of factors that affect the measurement of biofeedback learning and response awareness.

show abstract

On the criteria for instrumental autonomic conditioning: A reply to Katkin and Murray.

Cited by 46 publications

References 30 publications

Avoidance Conditioning of Autonomic Responses in Man

Avoidance Conditioning of Autonomic Responses in Man

Differentiation of Heart Rate and Systolic Blood Pressure in Man by Operant Conditioning

Awareness of the response after feedback training for changes in heart rate and sudomotor laterality.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About