Studies of experimentally induced disturbance

Abstract

The following three studies report some factors involved in and methods of measuring experimentally induced disturbance. The first concerns a relatively simple variable operating at the time disturbance is created ; the second deals with the effect of a 'therapy' applied after the creation of a more complex kind of disturbance ; the third examines methods of measurement, since the first two studies raised doubts about the best means of representing degree of disturbance in quantitative terms. I. Adaptive and Non-adaptive Activity During DisturbanceVarious experiments (e.g., *, 12, 14, 15, l ' ) give evidence that overt muscular movements serve to restore equilibrium during autonomic disturbance. It can be predicted from later studies (3, lo, 11) that adaptive movements have a greater restoring effect than nonadaptive movements. This experiment was designed to test that prediction by comparing autonomic disturbance, measured through changes in skin conductance, under conditions of no movement, nonadaptive movement and adaptive movement. Subjectswho were unawzre of the purpose of the experiment.The Ss were 24 undergraduate volunteers, 12 male and IZ female, ApparatusThe apparatus provided a continuous record of skin conductance, hand movement, time and signals ; it consisted of three main parts :A psycho-galvanometer(a) was adapted to give a continuous record of skin conductance by a sparking method.(4) Gauze electrodes moistened with warm, centi-normal zinc sulphate solution were securely fixed to the anterior surface of each arm near the base of the wrist.Hand movements were recorded pneumatically from a rubber airfilled cylinder held in each hand and connected to an ink-writing tambour.Disturbance was created by an A.C. electric shock of about )-second duration delivered from an induction coil to electrodes placed on the anterior surface of the left forearm, midway between wrist and elbow.

Personal control over aversive stimuli and its relationship to stress.

“…Most studies of behavioral control have allowed the subject to modify (or at least to believe that he could modify) the objective nature of the threatening event. For example, subjects have been allowed (a) to prevent entirely or at least avoid some instances of a noxious stimulus, say, by having punishment contingent upon the performance of some task (e.g., Averill & Rosenn, 1972;Bowers, 1968;Glass & Singer, 1972;Houston, 1972); (b) to interpose rest periods or take time out from a series of noxious stimuli (Hokanson, DeGood, Forrest, & Brittain, 1971); (c) to terminate prematurely (escape) a noxious stimulus (Bandler, Madaras, & Bern, 1968;Champion, 1950;Elliot, 1969;Geer, Davison, & Gatchel, 1970;Geer & Maisel, 1972); or (d) to limit the intensity of a noxious stimulus (as when subjects select the level of shock they will tolerate in an experiment-cf. previous discussion).…”

CHANGES IN MOTOR RESPONSE WITH INCREASE AND DECREASE IN TASK DIFFICULTY IN NORMAL INDUSTRIAL AND PSYCHIATRIC PATIENT SUBJECTS1

“…Increase in speed measured by WA-B does not show significant correlations with increase in conductance. The work of Freeman & Pathman (1942) and Champion (1950) would lead us to expect that an increase in motor movement would result in a dissipation of autonomic disturbance. In the case of G.S.R.…”

Development of quantitative specifications for simulating the stress environment.

“…A number of studies (Champion, 1950;Corah & Boffa, 1970;Bowers, 1968;Houston, 19721 Szpiler & Epstein, 1976) have found that subjects reported less stress when they believed they had behavioral control in a situation (i.e., they could terminate or avoid the electrical shock). A number of researchers have found that control reduces arousal as the subject anticipates receiving shock (Geer et al, 1970;Szpiler & Epstein, 1976).…”