The Effects of Awareness and Successive Inhibition on Interoceptive and Exteroceptive Conditioning of the Galvanic Skin Response

The general conclusion from Soviet studies of interoceptive conditioning has been that interoceptive conditioning is unconscious, established at a slower rate, and is more resistant to extinction than exteroceptive conditioning. Forty‐eight paid volunteer subjects were classically conditioned to both interoceptive (0 and 50 degree C. water in an intubated balloon located between the bronchial and diaphragmatic constrictions of the esophagus) and exteroceptive CSs (256 and 512 Hz tones at 60 db). Significant interoceptive and exteroceptive conditioning of the GSR was obtained using responses occurring within the interstimulus or first interval (FIR) as well as the post‐UCS or second interval (SIR). FIR conditioning progressed at a slower rate to interoceptive than to exteroceptive stimulation whereas SIR conditioning was equally effective to both modes of stimulation. Unawareness of interoceptive stimulation or their reinforcement contingencies tended to eliminate FIR but not SIR conditioning. Although not statistically supported, successive inhibitory‐excitatory compounding of interoceptive and exteroceptive CSs indicated stronger response tendencies to the interoceptive CSs when equated to exteroceptive conditioning strength. These results demonstrate the complexity of GSR conditioning when CS modality, response types, and awareness of CS‐UCS contingencies are considered.