Are rules applied in Pavlovian electrodermal conditioning with humans general or outcome specific?

Abstract

There is growing evidence that in human skin conductance response (SCR) conditioning positive patterning (A−, B−, AB+) and negative patterning (A+, B+, AB−) are solved by applying two different rules. The present experiments investigated whether the representations of such rules are specific or general with regard to outcomes and response systems. In Experiment 1, we investigated SCR and eyelid conditioning with different types of training administered in an interleaved fashion. We found that positive patterning SCR conditioning interfered with negative patterning SCR conditioning, whereas eyeblink conditioning had no effect on SCR conditioning. In Experiment 2, in which eyeblink and SCR conditioning were administered in sequential fashion, the same result was obtained. We conclude that the rules involved in solving patterning tasks might be specific to outcomes and/or response systems.