UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Foreperiod length, reaction time and autonomic activity Lowery, Hilary Jane 1969

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1969_A8 L69.pdf [ 2.16MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0102257.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0102257-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0102257-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0102257-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0102257-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0102257-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0102257-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0102257-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0102257.ris

Full Text

FOREPERIOD LENGTH, REACTION TIME AND AUTONOMIC ACTIVITY by H i l a r y Jane Lowery B.A. , U n i v e r s i t y of A l b e r t a , Calgary, 1965 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF Master of A r t s i n tha Department of Psychology We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming to the requ i r e d -standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA 1969 In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t o f the r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r an advanced degree a t the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia, I a g r e e t h a t the L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and Study. I f u r t h e r a g r e e t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e c o p y i n g o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y p u rposes may be g r a n t e d by the Head o f my Department or by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s u n d e r s t o o d t h a t c o p y i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l not be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . ^ JO The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a . Vancouver 8, Canada ABSTRACT Four f o r e p e r i o d s , 6.1, 2.1, 1.1, and 0.6 seconds, were used to i n v e s t i g a t e the r e l a t i o n s h i p s between some components of the OR to a warning s i g n a l and r e a c t i o n time to a stim u l u s . I t was found that r e a c t i o n time was slowest w i t h the longest f o r e p e r i o d and f a s t e s t w i t h the s h o r t e s t f o r e p e r i o d . Duration of the components of the OR c o r r e l a t e d n e g a t i v e l y w i t h r e a c t i o n time, and no c o r r e l a t i o n was found between r e a c t i o n time and h e a r t - r a t e d e c e l e r a t i o n . Heart-rate d e c e l e r a t i o n was found to be maximal during the 6.1 second f o r e -p e r i o d and to c o r r e l a t e p o s i t i v e l y w i t h the du r a t i o n of the d e c e l e r a t i o n . The f i n d i n g s are discussed i n terms of a c e n t r a l process, and the i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r i n d i v i d u a l l e a r n i n g d i f f e r e n c e s are discussed i n terms of the response requirements of the task. i i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Abst r a c t . ; . i L i s t of Tables . . . i i i L i s t of Figures . . . i v Acknowledgements . . . v I n t r o d u c t i o n . . . 1 Method . . . 7 Results . . . 12 Di s c u s s i o n . . . 22 References . . . 30 Appendix A - C o r r e l a t i o n M a t r i x . . . 33 i i i LIST OF TABLES Table 1 C o r r e l a t i o n M a t r i x on Basal Data Table 2 A n a l y s i s of Variance on Reaction Time Table 3 I n t e r a c t i o n Between Foreperiods, T r i a l s , and Log^o Reaction Time Table 4 A n a l y s i s of Variance on P r e s i g n a l Skin Conductance Table 5 A n a l y s i s of Variance of Skin Conductance at the Time of tha Stimulus Table 6 The E f f e c t s of Foreperiod on Logi_o Reaction Time, P r e s i g n a l and Stimulus Skin Conductance Table 7 A n a l y s i s of Variance on D i f f e r e n c e i n Heart-r a t e Between Pre- and P o s t - s i g n a l Seven Second Periods Table 8 A n a l y s i s of Variance on the Duration of the Cardiac Response Table 9 A n a l y s i s of Variance on the D i g i t a l Vaso-motor Response Table 10 A n a l y s i s of V a r i ance on the Duration of the D i g i t a l Vasomotor Response Table 11 C o r r e l a t i o n s between the Durations of the Cardi o v a s c u l a r Responses and the Magnitude of the Responses Table 12 Time a f t e r Stimulus to A c c e l e r a t i o n Table 1, Appendix A: C o r r e l a t i o n s Between Some of the P h y s i o l o g i c a l Responses and R.T. f o r Ss 1-14. Page 12 13 14 15 17 17 19 19 20 20 21 26 33 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Hypothesized Reactions to a Warning S i g n a l Figure 2 Experimental Paradigm Figure 3 Components of the OR During the 2.1 Second Foreperiod Figure 4 Reaction Time as a Function of Foreperiod Figure 5 Heart-rate Change as a Function of T r i a l s Figure 6 Heart-rate Change as a Function of Foreperiod and T r i a l Blocks Figure 7 Pos t u l a t e d R e l a t i o n s h i p s Betvjeen the OR and R.T. V ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author wishes to acknowledge the c o n t r i b u t i o n s made to t h i s t h e s i s i n the form of advic e , c r i t i c i s m , and support by Dr. R. D. Hare and Dr. R. C. Tees. As s i s t a n c e on mechanical problems was appreciated from Mr. K e i t h Wood of the Psychology Department, U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. Thanks, too, go to Miss C a r o l Harriman, of the S t a t i s t i c a l Centre, and to Mr. John Jamieson, of the Department of Psychology f o r t h e i r help with the analyses and s t a t i s t i c s . The many others who gave advice and encouragement are als o g r a t e f u l l y acknowledged. F i n a l l y , my s p e c i a l thanks to my husband, who gave me constant support when the going got rough. INTRODUCTION Russian research has long been concerned with the i n v e s t i g a t i o n of the o r i e n t i n g r e a c t i o n (OR) of an animal to novel and/or meaningful s t i m u l i (Anokhin, 1958). U s u a l l y only the p e r i p h e r a l components of the OR are s t u d i e d ; however, i t i s assumed that these r e f l e c t the a c t i v i t y of the c e n t r a l nervous system. Sokolov (1963) , f o r example, b e l i e v e s that the OR r e f l e c t s the process' of matching incoming i n f o r m a t i o n w i t h i n f o r m a t i o n that the animal has already s t o r e d . Because i t i s considered an h o l i s t i c response (Anokhin, 1958), the OR i s thought to i n h i b i t a l l other a c t i v i t i e s of the organism, except when i t occurs during the course of some a c t i v i t y which i s i t s e l f connected w i t h the stimulus which e l i c i t e d the OR. In t h i s l a t t e r case e x c i t a t i o n of the ongoing response occurs. Some of the p e r i p h e r a l components of the OR are: 1) an increase i n s k i n conductance 2) p e r i p h e r a l v a s o c o n s t r i c t i o n 3) c e p h a l i c v a s o d i l a t i o n 4) p u p i l l a r y d i l a t i o n 5) h e a r t - r a t e d e c e l e r a t i o n 6) increased muscle tension ( s p e c i f i c and/or g e n e r a l ) . More c e n t r a l components are hippocampal theta a c t i v i t y , and alpha-blocking (Graham and C l i f t o n , 1966- Grastyan, et a l . , 1959; Lynn, 1966; Razran, 1961; Sokolov, 1963). The OR lowers d e t e c t i o n thresholds w i t h the e f f e c t of a m p l i f y i n g weak s t i m u l i , i n d i r e c t c o n t r a s t to the defensive r e a c t i o n (DR) which r a i s e s d e t e c t i o n thresholds (Lacey and Lacey, 1958, 1964- Lykken, 1968; Sokolov, 2 1963). Lacey and Lacey (1964, 1965) consider h e a r t - r a t e d e c e l e r a t i o n as r e f l e c t i n g the organism's '"acceptance" of the e x t e r n a l environment, and a c c e l e r a t i o n , a defensive r e a c t i o n component, as ' ' r e j e c t i o n . " In terms of t h e i r model, only b i p h a s i c responses would, t h e r e f o r e , be u s e f u l i n d i s t i n g u i s h i n g between an OR and a defensive r e f l e x . Such responses would be those mediated by both parasympathetic and sympathetic a c t i v i t y . One such b i p h a s i c response i s that of the p u p i l of the eye. Research on p u p i l d i l a t i o n suggests that the magnitude of p u p i l l a r y d i l a t i o n r e f l e c t s task d i f f i c u l t y f o r the i n d i v i d u a l (Hess and P o l t , 1964; Kahneman and Beatty, 1966; P a i v i o and Simpson, 1966; Simpson and P a i v i o , 1966). Kess and P o l t (1964) presented data which showed that the p u p i l d i d not r e t u r n to prestimulus l e v e l u n t i l the s o l u t i o n to an a r i t h m e t i c task had been v e r b a l i z e d , although there appeared to be some c o n s t r i c t i o n p r i o r to v e r b a l i z a t i o n . Holmes (1967) presented evidence that the speed of p u p i l l a r y c o n s t r i c t i o n , a parasympathetic response,, c o r r e l a t e d p o s i t i v e l y w i t h the speed at which a subject learned i n a v e r b a l c o n d i t i o n i n g paradigm, and w i t h the s u b j e c t ' s awareness of environmental contingencies. Holmes' (1967) f i n d i n g s and those of Hess and P o l t (1964) suggest the p o s s i b i l i t y that a c t i v e i n h i b i t i o n of an OR might r e l a t e to an i n d i v i d u a l ' s " c o n d i t i o n a b i l i t y " and the speed w i t h which he processes incoming info r m a t i o n . The OR and i t s components have o f t e n been used to o p e r a t i o n a l l y d efine a n x i e t y . Hare (1968) has reviewed s t u d i e s that suggest t h a t , i n psychopaths, i n whom avoidance c o n d i t i o n i n g i s impaired, the OR or conditioned g a l v a n i c s k i n response i s of r e l a t i v e l y short d u r a t i o n s i.e^., i t has a f a s t recovery time. Hare (1968) was unable to r e p l i c a t e these f i n d i n g s , although h i s "secondary or n e u r o t i c psychopaths" showed a slower recovery time than e i t h e r 3 the "primary'' or non-psychopathic groups. However, Hare (1968) also noted that the psychopathic group manifested slower habituation of responses with both sympathetic and parasympathetic mediation. Holmes' (1967) "rapid constrictors" were unlike Hare's psychopaths, since Holmes' subjects also manifested rapid habituation of the response. This raises some interesting questions concerning the OR. Grastyan, et a l . (1959), Sokolov (1963), and Vinogradova (1958) a l l mention that habituation of the OR occurs with repeated stimulation. They also speak of habituation of the OR as a conditioned'..!reflex is formed. Gale and Ax (1968) report that habituation of the galvanic skin response and peripheral vasomotor response does not occur in a differential conditioning paradigm to either the CS + or CS . Grastyan, et a l . (1959) report that the OR reoccurs during extinction, where uncertainty reoccurs. When, however, habituation does occur, such habituation is viewed by Vinogradova (1958) and Sokolov (1963) as the cortical control of the OR and presumably occurs when the incoming stimulus matches the stored information and is quickly processed. The mechanism for such rapid processing i s not mentioned in Sokolov (1963) ; however, Lykken (1968) has proposed a theory of 'preception" which involves "I individual differences in the abil i t y to attenuate afferent stimulation in paradigms involving a warning signal, jl.e^. , where predictability of a stimulus i s high. Lykken (1968) suggested that the abil i t y to maintain ''anticipatory afferent tuning" involves effort and that i t may be fatiguing i f i t must be maintained for a long time. If the OR is seen to habituate rapidly in some subjects, i t might then be viex^ed as reflecting the fact that such subjects 4 f i n d the stimulus h i g h l y p r e d i c t a b l e . However, i n view of Holmes' (1967) work and Vvkken's (1965) theory i t would appear that a measure other than h a b i t u a t i o n of the OR i s r e l a t e d to an i n d i v i d u a l ' s " c o n d i t i o n a b i l i t y . " Such a measure i s the d u r a t i o n of one OR. I t might be expected that some subjects cannot vary the d u r a t i o n of the OR; however, i f c o r t i c a l c o n t r o l i s "normal 1 , i t i s expected that the d u r a t i o n can be v a r i e d , w i t h i n c e r t a i n l i m i t s . [ I f , f o r example, a s i g n a l precedes a stimulus by too long a time i n t e r v a l , f a t i g u e may i n t e r f e r e with v i g i l a n c e (Lykken, 1968).] Lykken (1968) and Hern and Venables (1964) hc.ve provided data on the e f f e c t of a warning s i g n a l on r e a c t i o n time and the tw o - f l a s h - t h r e s h o l d (TFT). Horn and Venables report an i n t e r v a l between a s i g n a l and stimulus of 300 to 600 msecs. as being optimal i n the lowering of the TFT. Lykken (1968) found that a warning s i g n a l s u f f i c i e n t l y f a r i n advance of the stimulus to produce alph a - b l o c k i n g (100-300 msecs.) a l s o lowered r e a c t i o n time. I t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t , w i t h longer i n t e r v a l s , some of the v a r i a b i l i t y i n simple r e a c t i o n time i s due to d i f f e r e n c e s i n the duration of the OR. This i s i l l u s t r a t e d s c h e m a t i c a l l y i n Figure 1. I _ . . " ' " ' - :L r,A;y, c!.,.,.! i. JJM*A Staff! >i\ i*.S T«rn£. Figure 1' Hypothesized r e a c t i o n s to a warning s i g n a l . I n d i v i d u a l one has a s h o r t - l a t e n c y s l o n g - l i v e d OR. I n d i v i d u a l two has a long-latency OR, and I n d i v i d u a l three, a s h o r t - l a t e n c y , s h o r t - l i v e d OR. According to Anokhin's (1958) p o s t u l a t e that the OR i s h o l i s t i c , I n d i v i d u a l 1 (Figure 1) would have a longer r e a c t i o n time than I n d i v i d u a l 3. There are only two p o s s i b l e s i t u a t i o n s i n which t h i s would not be the case. Tha f i r s t s i t u a t i o n would be that i n which the motor response had already s t a r t e d when the OR occurred, as might be expected i n short s i g n a l - s t i m u l u s i n t e r v a l s ; , and the second, that i n which the s i g n a l has already been conditioned as the CS i n an avoidance or escape l e a r n i n g paradigm. Given that n e i t h e r of these two s i t u a t i o n s hold i n a r e a c t i o n time experiment w i t h a f a i r l y long s i g n a l - s t i m u l u s i n t e r v a l ( f o r e p e r i o d ) , the p r e d i c t i o n i s made that r e a c t i o n time i s f a s t e r when the d u r a t i o n of the OR i s s h o r t , and i t s magnitude i s s m a l l . Coquery and Lacey (1966) and Lacey and Lacey (1965) i n v e s t i g a t e d the r e l a t i o n s h i p between s i g n a l - i n i t i a t e d c a r d i a c d e c e l e r a t i o n and r e a c t i o n time to a s t i m u l u s . Their theory suggested that r e a c t i o n time should be f a s t e r when the s t i m u l u s , to which the response must be made, i s f a c i l i t a t e d by h e a r t - r a t e d e c e l e r a t i o n . Thus, they p r e d i c t e d a p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n between r e a c t i o n time and .heart-rate d e c e l e r a t i o n . Most of t h e i r data appeared to support t h e i r p r e d i c t i o n . However, Chase, Graham, and Graham (1968) d i s -agreed w i t h the Lacey's (1965) i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s . Lacey and Lacey (1965) had reported a polyphasic c a r d i a c response c o n s i s t i n g of an e a r l y d e c e l e r a t i o n , followed by a c c e l e r a t i o n , follovTed by d e c e l e r a t i o n which peaked at the time of the st i m u l u s . They noted that the p a t t e r n of the response changed w i t h f o r e p e r i o d l e n g t h , w i t h the e a r l y a c c e l e r a t o r y limb s a c r i f i c e d during the s h o r t e r f o r e p e r i o d s . Chase et a l . (1968) point out that both t h e i r own f i n d i n g s of a second d e c l a r a t i v e phase, and the ones reported by Lacey and Lacey (1965) should be viewed as conditioned a n t i c i p a t o r y responses and not 6 ORs, s i n c e they were c l e a r l y not extensions of the d e c e l e r a t i o n f o l l o w i n g the s i g n a l . I f t h i s i s so, then the f i r s t d e c e l e r a t i o n noted by both Chase et a l . (1968) and Lacey and Lacey (1965) might be viewed as an OR which v a r i e d i n length depending on the length of the f o r e p e r i o d . Using a non-continuous s i g n a l , i t was decided to t e s t the hypothesis that the d u r a t i o n of an OR could be v a r i e d by v a r y i n g f o r e p e r i o d s . Some s p e c i f i c p r e d i c t i o n s were 1) Duration, as defined by the length of time from s t a r t to f i n i s h of the c a r d i o v a s c u l a r response, would be longest w i t h the longest f o r e p e r i o d , and s h o r t e s t w i t h the s h o r t e s t . ( I f two responses appeared i n the i n t e r v a l , only the f i r s t was to be scored.) 2) Maximal h e a r t - r a t e d e c e l e r a t i o n would occur during the longest f o r e -p e r i o d , gi'-en that i t was r e l a t e d to response d u r a t i o n . 3) Reaction time would be longest i n the longest f o r e p e r i o d , and f a s t e s t during the s h o r t e s t one. 4) Reaction time would be longer the longer the d u r a t i o n of the response. 5) Increased s k i n conductance at the time of the s t i m u l u s , as compared w i t h that p r i o r to the s i g n a l , would occur when r e a c t i o n times were slow. 7 METHOD Subjects The subjects (Ss) were nineteen male undergraduates and graduates at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. However, due to equipment f a i l u r e s only fourteen were in c l u d e d i n the analyses. The mean age of the Ss was twenty-four years. A l l were right-handed v o l u n t e e r s . Apparatus The s t i m u l i used were two tones 5 48 Hz. and 78 Hz. of .6 seconds d u r a t i o n . The tones were generated by two sine wave generators, and presented to the subject through stereo earphones. The loudness of each tone was judged to be s u b j e c t i v e l y equal and of moderate i n t e n s i t y by f i v e observers and the i n t e n s i t y remained the same f c r each subject. The response key was attached to a board on the r i g h t hand side of the armchair i n which the Ss sa t . The beard cculd be adjusted so that each subject could comfortably reach the response key w i t h h i s r i g h t index f i n g e r , and s t i l l have h i s arm supported. Reaction time (R.T.) was recorded by a timer accurate to .01 seconds. The timer was a c t i v a t e d only by the high tone. An Offner Type R Dynograph was used to measure r e s p i r a t i o n , h e a r t - r a t e , palmar s k i n r e s i s t a n c e , and ce p h a l i c and d i g i t a l vasomotor responses. Skin r e s i s t a n c e was determined by passing a 9 yamp/cm2 current through Beckman B i o p o t e n t i a l Electrodes attached to the second phalange of the f i r s t and t h i r d f i n g e r s of the l e f t hand. The vasomotor responses were monitored by p h o t o c e l l transducers on the forehead, and on the palmar surface of the f i r s t phalange of the thumb on the l e f t hand. Room l i g h t was prevented from i n t e r -f e r i n g w i t h the p h o t o c e l l s by covering them with black cotton c l o t h a f t e r they 8 were attached to the su b j e c t . R e s p i r a t i o n was measured by a s t r a i n gauge around the lower p a r t of the S_'s r i b cage. Heart-rate was recorded by two a c t i v e e l e c t r o d e s placed on the m i d l i n e of the chest, one above the heart and one on the sternum. A cardiotachometer converted the EKG s i g n a l to h e a r t -r a t e (beats per minute) . The S_ was grounded by an el e c t r o d e on the. l e f t s i d e of the r i b cage under the l e f t arm. A Gerbrand's three-channel tape programmer, running at a speed of 4.75 ram/sec, was used to t r i g g e r the tones, the r e a c t i o n timer, and a stimulus marker on the polygraph. Procedure The subject was seated i n an armchair i n a dimly l i t , s h i e l d e d , a i r -conditioned room. The temperature of the room averaged 71° and the humidity, 64%. The electr o d e s were attached to the subject., and the task was explained. The Ss were t o l d that they would hear a low tone ( s i g n a l ) followed by a high tone ( s t i m u l u s ) . The s i g n a l was to be a warning that the high tone was going to come on. I t was explained that the task was to press the response key as r a p i d l y as p o s s i b l e , without a n t i c i p a t i n g , whenever the high tone came on. The Ss were also t o l d that the i n t e r v a l between the low tone and high tone would vary, but, t h a t s f o r each block of ten t r i a l s , the i n t e r v a l would remain constant. This l a s t i n s t r u c t i o n , plus the use of a constant ten second i n t e r t r i a l i n t e r v a l and no "catch' : t r i a l s was an attempt to el i m i n a t e any u n c e r t a i n t y due to stimulus c o n d i t i o n s and i t s r e s u l t a n t e f f e c t s on R.T. (Chase, et a l . , 1968: Klemmer. 1956). A f t e r the i n s t r u c t i o n s were given, the S_ was asked to r e l a x w h i l e the experimenter c a l i b r a t e d the polygraph. The S_ was t o l d that the f i r s t ten t r i a l s would be p r a c t i c e t r i a l s and that the experimenter would give him a one minute warning before the t r i a l s began. About f i f t e e n minutes a f t e r the electr o d e s had been attached the one minute warning was given. Four fo r e p e r i o d s were used: .6 seconds, 1.1 seconds, 2.1 seconds, and 6.1 seconds. They were chosen because they were approximately equivalent to those used i n other experiments (Lacay and Lacey, 1965,; Hastings and O b r i s t , 1967). One-half of the Ss were run i n Order 1. They had ten p r a c t i c e t r i a l s w i t h the 2.1 second f o r e p e r i o d , and were then tes t e d on four blocks of ten t r i a l s each. The f i r s t block c o n s i s t e d of t r i a l s w i t h a 6.1 second f o r e p e r i o d , the second, of t r i a l s w i t h a 1.1 second f o r e p e r i o d , the t h i r d , of t r i a l s w i t h a .6 second f o r e p e r i o d , and the f o u r t h , of t r i a l s w i t h a 2.1 second f o r e p e r i o d . The other h a l f of the S_s were run i n Order 2. They p r a c t i c e d w i t h the 1.1 second f o r e p e r i o d , and were tested w i t h the t r i a l b l o c k s of foreperiods ordered .6, 2.1, 6.1, and 1.1 seconds. The experimental paradigm i s described i n Figure 2. Order 1 6.1 sees. T r i a l s 1-10 Ss 1 Foreperiods 1.1 sees. .6 sees. 2.1 sees. 1-10 1-10 1-10 Order 2 T r i a l s Ss 8 Foreperiods .6 sees. 2.1 sees. 6.1 sees. 1.1 sees, 1-10 1-10 1-10 1-10 14 Figure 2: Experimental paradigm w i t h length of foreperiods used, and the orders i n which the t r i a l blocks were presented. 10 Scoring Procedures During the minute preceding the one minute warning, b a s a l l e v e l s of autonomic a c t i v i t y were scored. These b a s a l data i n c l u d e d the mean h e a r t - r a t e (HR) and i t s standard d e v i a t i o n : the r e s p i r a t i o n r a t e per minute and the v a r i a b i l i t y , as estimated by r a t i n g s , of the r e s p i r a t i o n ; the rated v a r i a b i l i t y of the vasomotor responses; the mean s k i n conductance (SC) i n umhos: and the number cf n o n - s p e c i f i c g a l v a n i c s k i n responses (NSP's) o c c u r r i n g i n that minute. The s c o r i n g of the responses during the experiment proper was done as f o l l o w s . The pr o p o r t i o n change i n the s i z e of the blood volume pulse was c a l c u l a t e d f o r both the d i g i t a l and c e p h a l i c vasomotor responses. This was done by comparing the s i z e of the pulses during the f i v e seconds preceding the s i g n a l w i t h the s i z e of the pulses during the f i v e seconds a f t e r the s i g n a l . The presence of d i g i t a l v a s o c o n s t r i c t i o n a f t e r the s i g n a l was determined v i s u a l l y (see Figure 3) by an upward d e f l e c t i o n of the pen and/or a r e d u c t i o n i n pulse s i z e . The opposite phenomena were used to determine the presence of c e p h a l i c v a s o d i l a t i o n . The latency ( t i n e from s i g n a l to response beginning) and du r a t i o n (time from beginning of the response to i t s end) were then measured. Heart-rate d e c e l e r a t i o n was c a l c u l a t e d by s u b t r a c t i n g the mean of the three lowest beats during the 7 seconds p r i o r to the s i g n a l from the mean of the three lowest beats during the 7 seconds a f t e r the s i g n a l . The latency and du r a t i o n of the car d i a c d e c e l e r a t i o n was determined a f t e r v i s u a l i n s p e c t i o n revealed a decrease i n h e a r t - r a t e f o l l o w i n g the s i g n a l , and dur a t i o n was here defined as the time from the beginning of d e c e l e r a t i o n to the beginning of a c c e l e r a t i o n . The h e a r t - r a t e at the time of the stimulus was s c o r e d 5 as x<ras the s k i n conductance. The mean SC 11 c«»Mstr(.«.fe'.c'.n .T»«\«» Figure 3: Components of the OR during the 2.1 second foreperiod ( T r i a l 3). The respiration strain gauge was not functioning properly with this subject, however, d i g i t a l vasoconstriction, heart-rate deceleration, a G.S.R., and what appears to be cephalic vaso-constriction followed by vasodilation are shown. for the 5 seconds prior to the signal was also scored. 12 RESULTS P r e l i m i n a r y analyses of v a r i a n c e on the b a s a l data i n d i c a t e d no s i g n i -f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between S_s assigned to Order 1 and those assigned to Order 2. The mean HR f o r a l l Ss was 78.3 and the mean SC, 12.08 umhos. C o r r e l a t i o n s on the b a s a l data i n d i c a t e d s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s between responses r e f l e c t i n g sympathetic a c t i v i t y (see Table 1). B a s a l V a r i a b l e s 1 R e s p i r a t i o n Rate/minute 2 R e s p i r a t i o n V a r i a b i l i t y 3 D i g i t a l Vasomotor V a r i a b i l i t y 4 Heart-rate/minute 5 Cardiac V a r i a b i l i t y 6 Skin Conductance 7 N o n s p e c i f i c GSR's 8 Cephalic Vasomotor V a r i a b i l i t y *P<..05, N=15 Table 1: C o r r e l a t i 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1.00 -.72* 1.00 -.23 .49 1.00 -.03 .06 .57* 1.00 -.33 .66* .31 -.05 1.00 -.41 .14 .20 .23 -.27 1.00 -.42 .48 .17 .19 .07 .35 1.00 -.28 .28 .30 .42 .25 .56* .54* M a t r i x on Basal Data From Table 1 i t may be seen that the higher the heart r a t e , the l a r g e r was the v a r i a b i l i t y of the d i g i t a l blood volume p u l s e , and the higher the SC, the higher the number of NSP's. I t was noted f u r t h e r , that the more i r r e g u l a r the r e s p i r a t i o n , the l a r g e r the s i z e of the standard d e v i a t i o n of the HR ( c a r d i a c v a r i a b i l i t y ) , and the slower the r e s p i r a t i o n r a t e . Mo f u r t h e r a n a l y s i s was conducted on the b a s a l data. Figure 4 shows r e a c t i o n time as a f u n c t i o n of length of f o r e p e r i o d . As p r e d i c t e d , the longest f o r e p e r i o d r e s u l t e d i n the longest r e a c t i o n time, while the s h o r t e s t f o r e p e r i o d produced the s h o r t e s t r e a c t i o n time. The r e s u l t s of an a n a l y s i s of variance on t h i s data are presented i n Table 2. (In order to normalize the d i s t r i b u t i o n of r e a c t i o n time sc o r e s , the raw data were con-verted to Log-i() f o r t h i s a n a l y s i s . ) Neuman-Keuls t e s t s i n d i c a t e d that R.T. was s h o r t e s t during the .6 second f o r e p e r i o d ^ next s h o r t e s t during the 2.1 Source DF SS MS F Prob. Between Ss 13 5.6759 .4366 Order 1 .0849 .0849 n.s. -Error,, • . » (between) 12 5.5909 .4659 - -Within Ss 546 - - - -Foreperiods 3 2.7385 .9128 18.68* .0000 Foreperiods x Order 3 .1733 .0578 n.s. -E r r o r ^ 36 1.7596 .0489 - -T r i a l s 9 .6079 .0675 3.60* .0006 T r i a l s x Order 9 .3013 .0335 n.s. -E r r o r (T) 108 2.0276 .0188 - -Foreperiods x T r i a l s 27 1.3316 .0493 2.54''' .0001 Foreperiods x T r i a l s x Order 27 .5573 .0206 n.s. -E r r o r ( F T ) 324 6.2868 .0194 - — T o t a l 559 21.4600 - - -Table 2: A n a l y s i s of Variance on the Converted Reaction Time Data second f o r e p e r i o d , and longest during the 1.1 and 6.1 second f o r e p e r i o d s . The d i f f e r e n c e s were s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 l e v e l . T r i a l s a l s o had a s i g -n i f i c a n t e f f e c t , with r e a c t i o n time s h o r t e r on the l a s t t r i a l than on the f i r s t , as might be expected from p r a c t i c e . A s i g n i f i c a n t i n t e r a c t i o n between foreperiods and t r i a l s was more d i f f i c u l t to i n t e r p r e t . I t would appear, however, that p r a c t i c e e f f e c t s were s m a l l when the f o r e p e r i o d was long and the v a r i a b i l i t y , l a r g e (see Table 3). 14 T r i a l s .6 sees. 1, . 1 sees. 2.1 sees. 6.1 sees. 1 2.23 2.57 2.41 2.39 2 2.18 2.27 2.33 2.27 3 2.28 2.34 2.38 2.35 4 2.18 2.39 2.37 2.45 5 2.20 2.43 2.37 2.47 6 2.24 2.39 2.35 2.38 7 2.21 2.38 2.38 2.36 8 2.26 2.31 2.40 2.42 9 2.14 2.38 2.32 2.47 10 2.30 2.41 2.23 2.40 Table 3: I n t e r a c t i o n Between Foreperiods , T r i a l s and L o g 1 0 Reaction Time. A n a l y s i s of variance on p r e s i g n a l SC revealed s i g n i f i c a n t foreperiods and t r i a l s e f f e c t s (see Table 4). The p r e s i g n a l SC was higher during the block of t r i a l s using the longest f o r e p e r i o d . I f one considers t h i s measure to be i n d i c a t i v e of a r o u s a l , then i t would appear that the longest f o r e p e r i o d produced a high l e v e l of aro u s a l i n s u b j e c t s . Neuman-Keuls t e s t s i n d i c a t e d that the highest l e v e l of SC occurred during the block of t r i a l s w i t h the 1.1 second f o r e p e r i o d , next during the block of t r i a l s w i t h the 6.1 second f o r e p e r i o d , and lowest during the 2.1 and .6 second foreperiods (p<.05). 15 Source DF SS 'MS F Prob. Between Ss 13 222.43 1711.0 _ Order 1 103.25 103.25 n.s. -Error,, * (between) 12 221.40 1845.0 - -W i t h i n Ss 546 ._ — - -Foreperiods 3 548.92 182.97 5.74* .0027 Foreperiods x Order 3 55.495 18.50 n.s. -E r r o r ( F ) 36 1147.6 31.88 - -T r i a l s 9 23.116 2.57 2.22* .0257 T r i a l s x Order 9 19.104 2.12 n.s. E r r o r ( T ) 108 124.79 1.16 - -Foreperiods x T r i a l s 27 42.831 1.59 n.s. -Foreperiods x T r i a l s x Order 27 46.496 1.72 n.s. -E r r o r ( F T ) 324 857.39 2.65 - -T o t a l 559 25.109 — — -Table 4: A n a l y s i s of Variance on P r e s i g n a l Skin Conductance Trie SC at the time of the stimulus was al s o s i g n i f i c a n t l y a f f e c t e d by f o r e p e r i o d as i n d i c a t e d by Table 5. Neuman-Keuls t e s t s i n d i c a t e d that the highest l e v e l of SC at the time of the s i g n a l was during the 1.1 and 6.1 second f o r e p e r i o d s , w i t h no d i f f e r e n c e between the two, and lowest during the 2.1 and .6 second foreperiods (p<.05). (Very few subjects gave a gal v a n i c s k i n response (GSR) to the s i g n a l as w e l l as to the s t i m u l u s , so i t was decided to omit t h i s u s u a l measure and to look only at the more t o n i c changes i n s k i n r e s i s t a n c e . ) 17 Source .DF SS MS F Prob. Between Ss 13 22638 1741.4 Order 1 73.090 73.090 n.s. E r r o r „ , 12 22565 1880.4 (between) Within Ss 546 Foreperiods 3 515.74 171.91 5.82* .0025 Foreperiods x Order 3 64.862 21.621 n.s. E r r o r , ^ 36 1063.7 29.548 T r i a l s 9 19,398 2.1554 n.s. T r i a l s x Order 9 14.427 1.6030 n.s. E r r o r ( T ) 108 142.12 1.3159 Foreperiods x T r i a l s 27 46.894 1.7368 n.s. Foreperiods x T r i a l s x Order 27 36;086 1.3365 n.s. E r r o r . 324 932.17 2.8771 -(FT) T o t a l 559 25473. -Table 5: A n a l y s i s of Variance on Skin Conductance at the Time of the Stimulus Table 6 summarizes the. e f f e c t s of f o r e p e r i o d on LogjQ R.T. , p r e s i g n a l SC, and stimulus SC. Measure .6 sees. 1.1 sees. 2.1 sees. 6.1 sees. X L o g 1 0 R.T. 2 .2219 2.3881 2.3539 2.3953 P r e s i g n a l SC 13 .8301 15.9744 13.7113 15.4536 Stimulus SC 13 .7619 15.8027 13.7896 15.5726 Table 6: The E f f e c t s of Foreperiods on L o g 1 0 Reaction Time, P r e s i g n a l and Stimulus Skin Conductance I t would appear that the presence of minor a c t i v i t y i n the d i r e c t i o n of higher SC (foreperiods 2.1 and 6.1 seconds) was r e l a t e d to a longer R.T* when the background l e v e l of aro u s a l was h i g h , i ^ . e_. , during the 6.1 second f o r e p e r i o d , but to a s h o r t e r R.T. when the background l e v e l of a r o u s a l was 18 was low, i _ . e_. , during the 2.1 second f o r e p e r i o d . This gives t e n t a t i v e support to Lykken ?s (1968) hypothesis that Ss under high a r o u s a l w i l l perform poorly with a warning, whereas, those under low a r o u s a l c o n d i t i o n s w i l l perform w e l l w i t h a warning, e_._f. , the .6 and 2.1 second foreperiods versus the 1.1 and 6.1 second f o r e p e r i o d s . Analyses of variance on the c a r d i o v a s c u l a r v a r i a b l e s a l s o i n d i c a t e d s i g n i f i c a n t f o r e p e r i o d e f f e c t s (see Tables 7-10). Because the d u r a t i o n of these responses were based on the s u b j e c t i v e e s t i m a t i o n that the response occurred, acceptance of these measures as v a l i d was based on two r e q u i s i t e s . The f i r s t was that d u r a t i o n was to be r e l a t e d to magnitude of the response, and the second was that v a r i a b l e s found to e f f e c t the o b j e c t i v e magnitude measures were al s o to e f f e c t the d u r a t i o n measures. Thus, because a v a r i a b l e l i k e f o r e p e r i o d l e n r t h was not found to e f f e c t the c e p h a l i c blood volume p u l s e , w h i l e i t was found to e f f e c t the ''duration' 1 of the c e p h a l i c vasomotor response, the data on d u r a t i o n were considered i n v a l i d , and the r e s u l t s of analyses omitted. ( I t must be noted that the c e p h a l i c vasomotor response was not c l e a r l y manifested by many s u b j e c t s , and i t was expected that t h i s data xvould be i n v a l i d p r i o r to the analyses,) Source DF SS MS F Prob. Between Ss 13 880.50 67.730 Order 1 170.42 170.42 n.s. Error„ , 12 710.07 59.173 (between; Within Ss 546 -Foreperiods 3 641.04 213.68 9.88* .0001 Foreperiods x Order 3 57.914 19.305 n.s. Erro 1- ^ : 36 778.33 21.620 \ j T r i a l s 9 312.16 34.685 2.50* .0123 T r i a l s x Order 9 128.20 14.244 n.s. E r r o r ( T ) 108 1497.2 13.863 Foreperiods x T r i a l s 27 . 358.80 13.289 n.s. Foreperiods x T r i a l s x Order 27 446.51 16.538 n.s. - • E r r o r ( F T ) 324 4420.9 13.645 T o t a l 559 9521.5 Table 7: A n a l y s i s of Variance on D i f f e r e n c e i n Heart-rate Between Pro.- and P o s t - s i g n a l Seven Second Periods Source DF SS MS Prob. Between S_s 13 Order 1 Error,, N 12 (between) Wi t h i n Ss 546 Foreperiods 3 Foreperiods x Order 3 E r r o r ( F ) 36 T r i a l s 9 T r i a l s x Order 9 E r r o r ^ 108 Foreperiods x T r i a l s 27 Foreperiods x T r i a l s x Order 27 324 80.807 6.2159 21.569 21.569 59.237 4.9364 570.77 190.26 7.8527 2.6176 63.165 1.7546 E r r o r (FT) 17.664 17.369 125.17 41.294 31.822 406.46 1.9627 1.9299 1.1589 1.5294 1.1786 1.2545 n.s. 108.43* .0000 n.s. 1.69 n.s. n.s. n.s. .0987 T o t a l 559 1362.4 Table 8; A n a l y s i s of Variance on Duration of the Cardiac Response 20 Source BF SS MS F Prob. Between Ss 13 25.704 1.9772 Order 1 .3554 .3554 n.s. -Error., . (between; 12 25.348 2.1124 - — W i t h i n Ss 546 - - - -Foreperiods 3 18.354 6.1179 7.38* .0006 Foreperiods x Order 3 2.8933 .9644 n.s. -E r r o r ( p ) 36 29.826 . 8285 - -T r i a l s 9 11.459 1.2733 n.s. -T r i a l s x Order 9 9.8576 1.0953 n.s. -Error,... 108 112.87 1.0451 - -Foreperiods x T r i a l s 27 23.556 .8728 n.s. -Foreperiods x T r i a l s x Order 27 21.992 .8145 n.s. -E r r° r(FT) 324 322.41 .9951 - -T o t a l 559 578.93 - - -Table 9: A n a l y s i s of Variance on the D i g i t a l Vasomotor Response Source DF SS MS F Prob. Between Ss 13 256.06 19 .697 Order i 41.530 41 .530 n.s. -Error., ^ . 12 214.53 17 .877 (between) Within Ss 546 ... - — Foreperiods 3 1333.1 444 .38 47.54* .0000 Foreperiods x Order 3 2.4879 .8293 n.s. -E r r o r ( F ) 36 336.48 9 .3468 - -T r i a l s 9 23.429 2 .6032 n.s. -T r i a l s x Order 9 24.935 2 .7706 n.s. -E r r o r ( T ) 108 323.19 2 .9925 - -Foreperiods x T r i a l s 27 79.442 2 .9423 n.s. -Foreperiods x T r i a l s x Order 27 75,656 2 .8021 n.s. -E r r o r ( p T ) 324 1179.0 3 .6389 - -T o t a l 559 3633.8 - - -Table 10: A n a l y s i s of Variance op. the Duration of the D i g i t a l Vasomotor Response 21 As p r e d i c t e d , maximal HR d e c e l e r a t i o n occurred during the 6.1 second f o r e p e r i o d (p<.05). The s m a l l e s t d e c e l e r a t i o n occurred during the .6 second f o r e p e r i o d , next s m a l l e s t during the 1.1 second f o r e p e r i o d , and next during the 2.1 second f o r e p e r i o d : however, these d i f f e r e n c e s were not s i g n i f i c a n t . T r i a l s also a f f e c t e d the cardiac response (see Figures 5 and 6) w i t h the response h a b i t u a t i n g over t r i a l s . Of i n t e r e s t i s the f i n d i n g that d i g i t a l v a s o c o n s t r i c t i o n was greatest during the s h o r t e s t f o r e p e r i o d , next during the 1.1 second f o r e p e r i o d , smaller during the 2.1 second f o r e p e r i o d , and s m a l l e s t during the 6.1 second f o r e p e r i o d (p£.05). Since the d u r a t i o n of both the c a r d i a c and d i g i t a l responses was longest during the 6.1 second f o r e p e r i o d , next during the 2.1 second f o r e p e r i o d , and s h o r t e s t during the .6 and 1.1 second for e p e r i o d s (p<.05), i t would be expected that a low c o r r e l a t i o n would hold between the magnitude of the d i g i t a l response and i t s d u r a t i o n , and a s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n would h o l d between the magnitude of the c a r d i a c response and i t s d u r a t i o n . Table 11 i n d i c a t e s the c o r r e l a t i o n s between the durations of the c a r d i a c and d i g i t a l responses, and between the d u r a t i o n of the responses and t h e i r magnitude. The negative c o r r e l a t i o n between the d u r a t i o n and magnitude of the c a r d i a c response i n d i c a t e s that the greater the d e c e l e r a t i o n , the longer the d u r a t i o n of the d e c e l e r a t i o n . Magnitude of r, _ • c TN- i n Cardiac Duration of D i g i t a l Response _ Response  Foreperiods .6 sees. 1.1 sees. 2.1 sees. 6.1 sees. O v e r a l l O v e r a l l Duration of Cardiac Response .24* .18* .02 -.05 .42** -.14* Magnitude of D i g i t a l V a s o c o n s t r i c t i o n -O v e r a l l - - -- - .02 -*P<.05.: **p,<.oi Table 11: C o r r e l a t i o n s between the Durations of the Cardiovascular Responses, and between the Duration and Magnitude of the Responses 22 The r e s u l t s on duration are confounded by the p o s s i b i l i t y that any response to the s i g n a l i n the s h o r t e s t foreperiods would be attenuated by responses to the stimulus. However, such an explanation does not account f o r the f i n d i n g of a s m a l l but s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n (r=+.18) between the duration of the c a r d i a c and d i g i t a l responses and R.T. I f the response to the stimulus was overwhelming the s i g n a l response, a negative c o r r e l a t i o n might be expected. No s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n was found betx^een HR d e c e l e r a t i o n and R.T., even during the 6,1 second f o r e p e r i o d . DISCUSSION The length of the f o r e p e r i o d s i g n i f i c a n t l y a f f e c t e d most of the p h y s i o l o g i c a l v a r i a b l e s as w e l l as r e a c t i o n time. T h e o r e t i c a l l y , there was no reason to expect order of the t r i a l blocks to make a d i f f e r e n c e , and no d i f f e r e n c e s were found a t t r i b u t a b l e to order or to any i n t e r a c t i o n s w i t h order. Duration of the c a r d i o v a s c u l a r responses was longest during the longest f o r e p e r i o d , and c o r r e l a t e d p o s i t i v e l y w i t h r e a c t i o n time, which was a l s o longest during the longest f o r e p e r i o d . Maximal h e a r t - r a t e d e c e l e r a t i o n occurred during the longest f o r e p e r i o d , and c o r r e l a t e d p o s i t i v e l y w i t h d u r a t i o n of the c a r d i a c response, but d i d not c o r r e l a t e w i t h r e a c t i o n time. The highest l e v e l of s k i n conductance occurred during the 1.1 and 6.1 second f o r e p e r i o d s , and the lowest, during the 2.1 and .6 second f o r e p e r i o d s , and r e a c t i o n time was f a s t e s t i n these l a t t e r foreperiods than i n the f i r s t . An experimental a r t i f a c t was probably the cause of the d u r a t i o n d i f f e r e n c e s between the s h o r t e r f o r e p e r i o d s and the longer ones; however, t h i s does not UAVX^ 0 1 Co • 1 iec« f o r fa-Sod) ~ " -\ — _ \ : — e.f««"» <oel) i p e r i o d ) -2. -?> i PR "Sl< L- T B v « £».«..;. k.'.JAeo. •C unc-Vi or K 1 . BLOC K \ o L ex-r\cL -L«".*l TriftAs \ - *»! \ TnccW fc-iQ. ; 25 e x p l a i n , completely, the f i n d i n g of a p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n between d u r a t i o n and r e a c t i o n time. I t was found t h a t , whereas heart-rate, d e c e l e r a t i o n was maximal during the longest f o r e p e r i o d , d i g i t a l v a s o c o n s t r i c t i o n was maximal during the s h o r t e s t . I t i s p o s s i b l e that d i g i t a l v a s o c o n s t r i c t i o n to the s i g n a l was accentuated by c o n s t r i c t i o n to the stimulus and button-push, whereas the d e c e l e r a t i v e HR component was i n h i b i t e d by a c c e l e r a t i o n to the stimulus and button-push. Chase, et a l . (1968) have reported that HR a c c e l e r a t e d i n a n t i c i p a t i o n of e x e r c i s e , and they a l s o reported, as d i d Lacey and Lacey (1965), that HR a c c e l e r a t i o n began at the time of the stimulus i n t h e i r r e a c t i o n time experiments. The use of a non-continuous s i g n a l may have played a strong r o l e i n producing r e s u l t s i n c o n t r a d i c t i o n to the Lacey's (1965). For the subject who has nothing to attend to ( e x t e r n a l l y ) during a long f o r e p e r i o d , d e c e l e r a t i o n of the h e a r t - r a t e may w e l l r e f l e c t w a i t i n g 'at a t t e n t i o n " f o r the s t i m u l u s , i n l i n e w i t h the Lacey's hypotheses; however, according to Lykken's (1968) theory, t h i s might w e l l be f a t i g u i n g i n that the arousal s t a t e might be too high and might i n h i b i t a motor response. I t was found that r e a c t i o n times were slowest i n the two foreperiods w i t h the highest l e v e l of s k i n conductance. T h e o r e t i c a l l y , an OR only occurs to ''meaningful" s t i m u l i . One may argue that the s i r n a l i n both the 6.1 and 2.1 second foreperiods were e q u a l l y meaningful i n terms of the f a c t that both were xjarnings; however, there may be some j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r regarding the 6.1 second warning s i g n a l as too f a r i n advance of the stimulus to serve i t s f u n c t i o n p r o p e r l y , yet i n s u f f i c i e n t l y f a r i n advance to be ignored. 26 Anokhin (1958) views the OR as having a f a c i l i t a t o r y e f f e c t on e i t h e r an ongoing response or a conditioned response, and an i n h i b i t o r y e f f e c t on any response beginning a f t e r OR onset. The f a s t R.T. o c c u r r i n g w i t h a 2.1 second warning might be viewed as evidence f o r response f a c i l i -t a t i o n , whereas the motor response would be i n h i b i t e d i n the 6.1 second f o r e p e r i o d , w h i l e the ''wait'1 response was f a c i l i t a t e d . O b r i s t (1968) presents evidence which may be viewed as supporting t h i s hypothesis. O b r i s t suggests that cardie-somatic i n h i b i t i o n produced the r e s u l t s i n h i s experiment using a 7.0 second i n t e r s t i m u l u s i n t e r v a l between a s i g n a l and shock. These r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e d that EMG a c t i v i t y (muscle tension) decreased as the a n t i c i p a t o r y d e c e l e r a t i o n began. Using a 1.0 second i n t e r s t i m u l u s i n t e r v a l , however, he found that a n t i c i p a t o r y c a r d i a c a c c e l e r a t i o n began s h o r t l y a f t e r a d e c e l e r a t i v e phase and was concomitant w i t h increased EMG a c t i v i t y . Increased EMG a c t i v i t y might be expected to c o i n c i d e w i t h instances of f a s t r e a c t i o n times. In the present experiment HR a c c e l e r a t i o n began more q u i c k l y a f t e r the stimulus i n the 2.1 second f o r e p e r i o d than i n the 6.1 second f o r e p e r i o d (see Table 12). From O b r i s t ' s (1968) data, then, one might have expected that r e a c t i o n t i n e s would be f a s t e s t i n the 2.1 second f o r e p e r i o d . Foreperiod 2.1 sees. 6.1 sees. Time taken a f t e r s timulus to a c c e l e r a t i o n 0.87 sees. 1.17 sees. Table 12: T i i rae Taken A f t e r Stimulus Before A c c e l e r a t i o n Another of Anokhin's (1958) hypotheses concerning the OR i s that the p e r i p h e r a l responses s t u d i e d are merely components of the OR and are 27 merely components cf the OR and are i n d i c a t i v e of the occurrence of c e n t r a l processing. C e r t a i n l y the c o r r e l a t i o n data would appear to r e f l e c t t h i s . There was l i t t l e evidence f o r the p e r i p h e r a l responses c o r r e l a t i n g w i t h r e a c t i o n time, although the dur a t i o n of the responses was c o r r e l a t e d w i t h the s i z e of the p e r i p h e r a l responses and with r e a c t i o n time. This might be viewed as the e f f e c t of some c e n t r a l process governing the d u r a t i o n of the p h y s i o l o g i c a l responses, which i n turn c o r r e l a t e s w i t h both the magnitude of the response, as w e l l as with the speed of a motor response. S c h e m a t i c a l l y , t h i s may be depicted as i n Figure 7. C e n t r a l Mechanisms Duration Magnitude Reaction of Time Response Figure 7; Po s t u l a t e d R e l a t i o n s h i p s Between the OR and R.T. O b r i s t (1968) a l s o remarks that both the car d i a c and somatic responses may be viewed as r e f l e c t i n g some c e n t r a l process, t h a t , due to the s i t u a t i o n a l requirements, may r e s u l t i n e i t h e r cardio-somatic i n h i b i t i o n or f a c i l i t a t i o n . Lykken (1968) p o s t u l a t e d that f o r subjects under low ar o u s a l c o n d i t i o n s , a warning s i g n a l would lead to r e t i c u l a r a c t i v a t i o n of the cortex which would r e s u l t i n the f a c i l i t a t i o n of a motor response as w e l l as the f a c i l i t a t i o n of an incoming, second s i g n a l . For subjects under high a r o u s a l c o n d i t i o n s , however, a warning s i g n a l would r e s u l t i n c o r t i c a l e x c i t a t i o n to such an extent that i t would i n h i b i t the r e t i c u l a r system, and, thus, delay the perception of a second s i g n a l , and i n h i b i t a motor response. I n s o f a r as the SC data may be 28 taken as i n d i c a t i v e of a subject's a r o u s a l s t a t e the data may als o be considered as support f o r Lykken's hypotheses. From t h i s data i t i s p o s s i b l e to suggest, t e n t a t i v e l y , c e r t a i n r e l a t i o n -ships which would be expected to hold i n c l a s s i c a l and operant c o n d i t i o n i n g paradigms. In terms of passive avoidance c o n d i t i o n i n g , i n d i v i d u a l s manifest-ing a long d u r a t i o n OR should be expected to c o n d i t i o n w e l l ; however, they might do l e s s w e l l i f an a c t i v e motor response was req u i r e d of the s i t u a t i o n . I f , however, the OR of such i n d i v i d u a l s a l s o habituated q u i c k l y , g i v i n g r i s e to the defensive r e a c t i o n , then a motor response would be expected to be f a c i l i t a t e d . In an operant c o n d i t i o n i n g s i t u a t i o n , the presence of a l o n g - l a s t i n g OR to a s i g n a l should c o r r e l a t e with an i n d i v i d u a l ' s a b i l i t y to perform w e l l i n a l i m i t e d hold procedure, where he i s r e q u i r e d to i n h i b i t a response. An i n d i v i d u a l (e.g., a c h i l d ) i n whom the OR was poorly developed, or i n whom the OR was of short d u r a t i o n , might not do as w e l l , and might be viewed as unable to avoid punishment or obta i n a reward, even though the contingencies might be v e r b a l i z e d . The use of v a r y i n g s i g n a l - s t i m u l u s i n t e r v a l s might, w i t h such s u b j e c t s , r e s u l t i n the f i n d i n g of p a r a d o x i c a l response f a c i l i t a t i o n even though the stimulus expected i s noxious, and contingent on response suppression. Because t h i s ' i n h i b i t i o n " of the OR would depend, i n p a r t , on the maturity of the i n d i v i d u a l , t h i s may be what Luria(1963) i s speaking of when he t a l k s of the i n h i b i t o r y e f f e c t of language on a c h i l d ' s motor response, _i.e. , i t may f u n c t i o n to i n h i b i t the OR. Although t h i s study used a small number of s u b j e c t s , i t must be noted that Hastings and O b r i s t (1967) obtained s i m i l a r r e s u l t s . In t h e i r study, maximal d e c e l e r a t i o n v/as found to occur with longer foreperiods (13 and 7 29 seconds) than w i t h a short (.8 second) f o r e p e r i o d s . They al s o found that d e c e l e r a t i o n peaked l a t e r i n the 13 second f o r e p e r i o d , p o s s i b l y the equivalent of the d u r a t i o n spoken of i n t h i s paper. Thus, the f i n d i n g s may not be as l i m i t e d i n g e n e r a l i t y as the number of subjects micht suggest. 30 REFERENCES Anokhin, F. K. The r o l e of the o r i e n t i n g - e x p l o r a t o r y r e a c t i o n i n the formation of the conditioned r e f l e x . In Vcronin, L. G., Leontiev, A.N., L u r i a , A. R.. , Sokolov, A. N. , & Vinogradova, 0. S. The o r i e n t i n g r e f l e x and e x p l o r a t o r y behaviour. Moscow: The Academy of Pedagogical Sciences of R . S.F.S . R . , 1958. (Trans. American I n s t i t u t e of B i o l o g i c a l Sciences, 1965.) Pp. 3-16. Chase, W. G. , Graham, F. K ., & Graham 5 D. T. Components of HR response i n a n t i c i p a t i o n of r e a c t i o n time and e x e r c i s e tasks. J o u r n a l of Experimental Psychology, 1968, 76> 642-648. Coquery, J . M., & Lacey, J . I. The e f f e c t of f o r e p e r i o d duration on the components of the c a r d i a c response during the f o r e p e r i o d of a r e a c t i o n -time experiment. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society f o r P s y c h o p h y s i o l o g i c a l Research, Oct. 1966. Gale, E. N., & Ax, A. P. Long-term c o n d i t i o n i n g of o r i e n t i n g responses. Psychophysiology, 1568. 5, 307-315. Graham, F. K. , & C l i f t o n , R. K. Heart-rate change as a component of the o r i e n t i n g response. P s y c h o l o g i c a l B u l l e t i n , 1966, 65, 305-320. Grastyan, E. , L i s s a k , K. , Msdarasz,, I . , & Donhoffer, K. Hippocampal e l e c t r i c a l a c t i v i t y during the development of conditoned r e f l e x e s . Electroencephalography and C l i n i c a l Neurophysiology, 1959, 11, 409-430. Hare s R. D. Psychopathy, autonomic f u n c t i o n i n g , and the o r i e n t i n g response. J o u r n a l of Abnormal Psychology, Monograph Supplement, June 1968, 73. H a s t i n g s , S. E. , & O b r i s t , P. A. Heart-rate during c o n d i t i o n i n g i n humans: e f f e c t of v a r y i n g the i n t e r s t i m u l u s (CS-UCS) i n t e r v a l . J o u r n a l of  Experimental Psychology, 1967, 74, 431-442. 31 Hess s E. H.j & P o l t , J . M. P u p i l s i z e i n r e l a t i o n to mental a c t i v i t y during simple problem-solving. Science, 1964, 143, 1190-1192. Horn, G.,, & Venables, P. H. The. e f f e c t of somaesthatic and a c o u s t i c s t i m u l i on the t h r e s h o l d of f u s i o n of p a i r e d l i g h t f l a s h e s i n human s u b j e c t s . Q u a r t e r l y J o u r n a l of Experimental Psychology, 1964, 1_6, 289-296. Klemmer, E. T. Time u n c e r t a i n t y i n simple r e a c t i o n time. J o u r n a l of Experimental Psychology, 1956, 51, 179-184. Lacey, B. C., & Lacey J . I . Cardiac d e c e l e r a t i o n and simple v i s u a l r e a c t i o n time i n a f i x e d preperiod experiment. Paper presented at S o c i e t y f o r P s y c h o p h y s i o l o g i c a l Research, Wash. D. C., Oct. 1964. Lacey, B. C„, & Lacey, J . I . Cardiovascular and r e s p i r a t o r y c o r r e l a t e s of r e a c t i o n t i n e . Pels Research I n s t i t u t e Progress Report, June, 1965. Lacey, J . I . , & Lacey, 3 . C. The r e l a t i o n s h i p of r e s t i n g autonomic a c t i v i t y to motor i m p u l s i v i t y . The B r a i n and Human Behaviour, Ba l t i m o r e : W i l l i a m s and W i i k i n s , 1958, 144-209. L u r i a , A. R. The mentally retarded c h i l d . New York: The MacMillan Co., 1963. Lykken, D. T.- Neuropsychology and psychophysiology i n p e r s o n a l i t y research: P a r t I . In E. Borgatta and W. Lambert (Eds.), Handbook of P e r s o n a l i t y  Theory and Research. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1968. Pp. 413-509. Lynn, R. A t t e n t i o n , a r o u s a l and the o r i e n t a t i o n r e a c t i o n . London: Pergamon Press, 1966. O b r i s t , P. A. Heart-rate and somatic-motor coupling during c l a s s i c a l a v e r s i v e c o n d i t i o n i n g i n humans. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1968, 75, P a i v i o , A., & Simpson, H. M. The e f f e c t of word abstractness and p l e a s a n t -ness on p u p i l s i z e during an imagery task. Psychonomic Science, 1966, 5_, 55-56. 32 Razran, G. The observable unconscious and the i n f e r a b l e conscious i n current S oviet psychology: i n t e r o c e p t i v e c o n d i t i o n i n g , semantic c o n d i t i o n i n g , and the o r i e n t i n g r e f l e x . P s y c h o l o g i c a l Review, 1961, 68, 81-147. Simpson, H. M,, & P a i v i o , A, Changes i n p u p i l s i z e during an imagery task without motor involvement. Psychonomic Science, 1966, 12_, 572-585. Sokolov, E. N. Perception and the conditioned r e f l e x . New York: MacMillan, 1963. Vinogradova, 0. S, Ou the dynasties of the o r i e n t i n g r e f l e x i n the course  of c l o s u r e of a conditioned connection, 1958. In Voronin, et a l . , 1965, 45-53. Voronin, L. G, , L e o n t i e v , A. N., L u r i a , A. R., Sokolov, E. N . , & Vinogradova, 0. S. O r i e n t i n g r e f l e x and e x p l o r a t o r y behaviour, Wash. D. C.: American I n s t i t u t e of B i o l o g i c a l Sciences, t r a n s l a t i o n , 1965. 3/ Appendix A C o r r e l a t i o n M a t r i x on Ss 1-14 34 Table 1: C o r r e l a t i o n s between Some of the P h y s i o l o g i c a l Responses and Reaction Times f o r Subjects 1-14, .6 sees. 1.1 sees. 2.1 sees. 6.1 sees. 153.5 230.5 174.0 215.5 P r e s i g n a l SC .60 .46 .44 -.36 D i g i t a l Response -.05 .59 .03 .15 Cephalic Response .48 .33 .63 -.31 *Cardiac Response -.05 .23 -.28 -.26 R.T. 219.5 284.0 251.5 228.5 P r e s i g n a l SC -.77** -.44 .51 -.42 D i g i t a l Response -.24 .10 .08 -.56 Cephalic Response -.46 -.35 .03 .07 Cardiac Response .32 .12 -.42 .28 R.T. 177.0 257.0 198.0 440.5 P r e s i g n a l SC -.34 -.69** .38 .22 D i g i t a l Response .02 -.41 -.15 .11 Cephalic Response -.14 .23 -.14 -.22 Cardiac Response -.21 .22 -.34 -.22 R.T. 177.0 266.0 277.5 262.0 P r e s i g n a l SC -.34 .47 -.02 .19 D i g i t a l Response .02 -. 14 .12 .34 Cephalic Response -.14 .40 . 14 -.44 Cardiac Response -.21 .50 -.29 -.12 R.T. 160.5 265.5 259.0 370.0 P r e s i g n a l SC .40 -.31 .13 -.16 D i g i t a l Response -.46 -.21 -.37 .40 Cephalic Response -.01 .19 -.33 .40 Cardiac P.esponse .30 -.23 .20 .06 R.T. 128.5 156.0 185.0 185.5 P r e s i g n a l SC .65** -.39 -.14 .34 D i g i t a l Response -.15 .56 -.02 -.14 Cephalic Response .77** -.02 .09 -.37 Cardiac Response -.63** .38 -.44 -.24 R.T. 202.5 291.5 365.5 355.0 P r e s i g n a l SC .22 -.33 .06 -.13 D i g i t a l P.esponse . 12 .09 -.05 .78** Cephalic Response . 16 -.10 .07 .62 Cardiac Response -. 12 .03 -.26 .69** 35 Table 1 Continued .6 sees, 1.1 sees. 2.1 sees. 6.1 sees, R.T. 227.5 287.0 286.5 269.0 P r e s i g n a l SC -.08 -.29 -.00 -.24 D i g i t a l Response -.39 .24 .09 .64** Cephalic Response .15 .29 -.02 .38 Cardiac Response -.02 -.12 .38 -.28 R.T. 146.0 200.5 208.5 186.5 P r e s i g n a l SC -.36 -.54 .30 -.13 D i g i t a l Response -.36 .09 -.02 -.50 Cephalic Response .59 .04 -.69** .04 Cardiac Response -.16 -.28 .34 .66** '10 P ^ P r e s i g n a l SC D i g i t a l Response Cephalic Response Cardiac Response 219 .5 . 10 .31 .13 .30 232.0 -.71 •-. 12 .26 .14 230.0 -.81 -.13 -. 18 -.56 229.9 .50 -.01 -.63** .77** - ' 1 1 R.T, 111.0 237.5 194.5 206.5 P r e s i g n a l SC .02 -.29 -.05 -.35 ' D i g i t a l Response -.29 .48 -.30 -.39 Cephalic Response .34 -.08 -.72** -.66** Cardiac Response .39 -.12 .01 .18 ' 1 2 Sl3 R.T. 255.5 501.0 352.5 508.0 P r e s i g n a l SC -.23 .01 .19 -.34 D i g i t a l Response -.18 .00 -.00 , -.15 Cephalic Response .32 .1.4 -.05 -.17 Cardiac Response .20 .07 -.05 .24 R.T. 164.0 214.5 212.0 241.5 P r e s i g n a l SC .04 .10 -.27 .45 D i g i t a l Response .76 -.05 .64** .42 Cephalic Response .49 .07 .25 -.12 Cardiac Response .00 -.50 -.35 -.40 P r e s i g n a l SC D i g i t a l Response Cephalic Response Cardiac Response 141.0 .36 -.22 -.46 -.41 203.5 -.55 -.03 -.65** -. 13 187.0 .07 .16 -.36 .33 173.5 -.61 .18 -.04 .42 *Negative c o r r e l a t i o n s i n d i c a t e that the f a s t e r the r e a c t i o n time the l e s s the HR d e c e l e r a t i o n . * * S i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s , p=.05. 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0102257/manifest

Comment

Related Items