The Pavlovian journal of biological science
-
Recent experimental studies in pain control have questioned the value of pleasant affect in strategies employing distraction. It appears that pleasant affect may have been systematically confounded with task complexity or novelty in past research that found pleasant imagery or slides effective in increasing pain tolerance with the cold pressor test. The present study was a follow-up to a study conducted by this author (Greenstein, 1984) in which unpleasant slides had significantly increased pain tolerance above pleasant slide level. ⋯ The results indicate that affect was confounded with other stimulus characteristics in the Greenstein (1984) pain control study and probably in a significant number of other studies as well. Researchers are cautioned to control for the stimulus characteristics of visual distraction strategies used in pain control studies. The assumption that pleasantness, per se, contributes to strategy effectiveness is no longer tenable; future research must demonstrate an independent effect.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
-
The ability of rats to reevaluate previously presented information in light of subsequently provided information was evaluated using a CER (conditioned emotional response) procedure. In Experiment 1, rats suppressed responding to a compound light + tone stimulus that was repeatedly paired with shock. Groups of rats were then presented with only one element of the compound (the tone), either presented alone or paired with shock, for 15 days. ⋯ The control groups showed that this effect was not due to the number of shock presentations received. A subsequent experiment also demonstrated that these results were not due to nonspecific stimulus effects. Apparently, a subsequent change in the associative strength of one element results in a similar change to the other element of a previously established compound stimulus.
-
More than two-thirds of an unselected sample of 34 college students reported mild headaches when told that a (nonexistent) electric current was passing through their heads. These reports appeared independent of whether the instructions emphasized the headache-producing effect of the current or whether the emphasis was on a perceptual task, with headache as only a possible side effect. The results are consistent with a view of pain as localized stress. They provide additional grounds for the suspicion that clinical focusing on pain may itself be a cause of pain.