Effects of conflict and field structure on arousal and motor responses

Abstract

Psychodynamic, learning and field theories have postulated that conflict increases arousal. Lewin has further suggested that more difficult conflicts produce proportionately greater arousal increments and that arousal is also a function of field structure, hypotheses that are consistent with optimal level theory. Moreover, studies involving open conflict fields and those involving maze fields differ importantly in findings. The present study measured both arousal and motor responses as a function of conflict type and field structure. Using paper‐and‐pencil fields, subjects performed under four different types of conflict and a control condition. Results showed that arousal increased significantly with increasing conflict complexity and were habitual over repeated trials, though arousal did not differentiate field conditions. Response speed was higher in the open field than in the maze field, and the relative speeds of the several conflict types varied as a function of field condition. In addition, speed increased over trials, but the rate of increase was greater for some conflicts than others. Response adequacy was greater in the open field than in the maze field condition, and response mode differentiated significantly between field types on early trials. Relevant results were partially supportive of hypotheses derived from optimal level and Lewinian theories.