Reaction time task as unconditional stimulus. Comparing aversive and nonaversive unconditional stimuli

Nonaversive unconditional stimuli (USs) are seldom used in human classic conditioning of autonomic responses. One major objection to their use is that they produce deficits in electrodermal (ED) second- and third-interval response conditioning. However, a nonaversive reaction time (RT) task that includes feedback of success has been shown to be an effective US while avoiding this disadvantage (Lipp and Vaitl 1988). The present study compared this new RT task (RT-new) with a traditional RT task (RT-old) and with a standard aversive US (shock) in differential classic conditioning of ED, heart rate (HR), and digital pulse volume (DPV) responses. Eight-second-delay differential conditioning was applied in three groups of 12 subjects each. Simple geometric features (square, cross) displayed on a television screen served as conditional stimuli (CS+ and CS-). In acquisition, there were no statistically significant differences among the groups; differential conditioning did occur in HR, first- and second-interval ED responses, and first-interval DPV responses. Separate analyses within each group, however, revealed that there was no second-interval ED conditioning in the RT-old group. During extinction, neither DPV nor second-interval ED conditioning could be obtained, whereas HR and first-interval ED conditioning occurred in each group. In third-interval omission ED responses, RT-old and shock groups exhibited extinction, while response differentiation was maintained in the RT-new group throughout extinction. The RT task including feedback proved to be as reliable a US as a standard aversive US, whereas application of a traditional RT task again yielded some weaknesses in second-interval ED conditioning.