The premise of equipotentiality in human classical conditioning: conditioned electrodermal responses to potentially phobic stimuli.

Abstract

The premise of equipotentiality, which has been widely adhered to among learning theorists, states that the laws of learning should not vary with the use of particular stimuli, responses, or reinforcements. This premise has recently been challenged by some data originating within the learning tradition itself, for example, studies on the effects of verbal stimuli in eye-lid conditioning. More importantly, however, the premise of equipotentiality is incompatible with data from experiments carried out within a biological-ethological framework. The results of such studies indicate that a given species is prepared to associate certain stimuli, responses, and reinforcers but not others. In an attempt to examine the validity of this premise in human classical conditioning, we investigated the effect of pictures of potentially phobic objects as conditioned stimuli (CSs) for electrodermal responses, since it has been suggested that phobias may be instances of biologically prepared learning. Three experiments are reported, all of them involving a long interstimulus interval differential conditioning paradigm with different pictures as CSs and electric shock as the unconditioned stimulus (UCS). In Experiment 1 we established that different pictures are differentially effective as CSs. A groupconditioned to potentially phobic stimuli, snakes or spiders, showed greater resistance to extinction than a group conditioned to fear-irrelevant pictorial stimuli, that is, flowers or mushrooms. A third group conditioned to "representative laboratory stimuli," circles or triangles, fell in between thses two groups. Experuce similar effects to those observed with phobic and fear-irrelevant stimuli in Experiment 1. In Experiment 3 superior resistance to extinction for phobic stimuli was demonstrated when the UCS was an electric shock, but not when it was a tone to which the subject produced reaction times. Thus, the effect appears specific for aversive UCSs, and CS-UCS "belongingness" has been demonstrated. It was concluded that our data do challenge the premise of equipotentiality in human conditioning. There are several learning-theory accounts that could accommodate at least some aspects of the data, but they seem to be best explained in terms of biologically orsiented constructs, such as preparedness.