In view of a possible theoretical formulation that the factor which produces the physiological response is not lying or guilt per se but rather something relative to the consequences of being detected, the information, which subjects perceive as to their detectability of deception when confronted with a device and test process, may be expected to play a major role in determining the results of detection. Thus, a motivational set plus continuous or immediate feedback from the activity of the autonomically influenced peripheral effector provides appropriate information concerning the lie detection situation, convincing the subjects that they will not be able to successfully deceive. Since the feedback the autonomic response via visual display was suggested to enable the subjects to modify their responses according to their motivation, it was preliminaly demonstrated that voluntary control of the skin potential response (SPR) with watching a visual display could not effectively prevent detection in the experimental situation where subjects were required to mask all his responses rather than responding voluntarily to wrong items. Then, a total of 30 college students participated in a detection of deception experiment designed to determine the effect of visual feedback from subjects own responses on the rates of detection, together with the feedback effect of psuedoresponses artificially induced. One of five cards was selected by each subject, and the SPR to the selected card was compared with the responses for (nonselected) cards in each of the 3 groups, consisting of 10 subjects. Subjects were motivated to deceive and withhold this response by means of the previous instructions which told the subjects that individuals with a great emotional control and superior intelligence were able to deceive successfully. One experimental (Feedback) group was provided with continuous visual feedback of their own SPR. The other experimental (feedback with psuedoresponse) group also received continuous feedback but was given a psuedo-response artificially induced for the first critical item. A control (Non-feedback) group received no feedback. The SPR used in all three groups were consistently found to discriminate deceptions better than by chance. As predicted, the results obtained from subjects who received feedback with psuedo-response were significantly superior in efficiency in discriminating deception to those of feedback group, and the lowest detection rates were found with non-feedback group. The feedback procedures were also found to yield some evidence to heighten the subject's autonomic reactions, and accordingly, the SPR's under the feedback procedures were free to some degree from an adaptation effect despite the successive presentation of items. In addition, the SPR produced more frequently diphasic wave-forms accompanied with large positive deflections to the critical items as opposed to the noncritical items. The findings conform to the “consequences theory of detection of deception” and suggest that the feedback procedure from the subjects' own record is a useful activation technique with which to drive the detection of deception. Furthermore, the use of the SPR may be recommended as a valuable indicator in detection of deception.
The mathematical theory of communication was applied to psychological testing and a formula for the entropy of a test was derived assuming an information transmission from the source of the postulated true score distribution to the destination, i.e. the observer. Two test score models, i.e. a simplified model of bivariate normal distribution of true and observed scores and the binomial error model, were both employed to calculate the entropy of the actual test data. The amount of information transmitted per subject was found to be surprisingly low. Under these test models, the rate of information transmission varied monotonically with test reliability. However, some of the results promised the possibility that a more detailed analysis of relationship between test structure and its entropy might clarify the meaning of the new measure.
The purpose of this paper was to examine the fact that extinction of ICSS (intracranial self-stimulation) is abnormally rapid and to test the drive-decay theory proposed by Deutsch. Exp. 1) Five groups of five white rats each with posterior hypothalamic electrodes were permitted to self-induce electric stimulation, 500, 1000, 2000, 4000, 8000 times, respectively in the Skinner box. Immediately after a series of self-stimulation, they were given extinction trials in which they received no electrical stimulus even if the lever was pressed. All subjects stopped responding as rapidly as previous studies have reported, but they only continued to press the lever in proportion to the number of reinforced stimuli within one minute after extinction started. Exp. 2) The procedure was almost the same as that of Exp. 1 except for the extinction trials. All subjects spent 24 hours in their home cages from the last reinforced stimuli until they received extinction trials. Results indicated that the number of reinforced stimuli only had a significant effect upon extinction resistance within one minute after extinction trials started. It was also shown that responses for hypothalamic stimulation disappeared more rapidly in extinction which was given 24 hours later than in immediate extinction. In both experiments, spontaneous recovery took place in the extinction process of ICSS. Thus the drive-decay theory of extinction of ICSS was only partially demonstrated.
Light threshold increases as the distance between a test spot and an inducing figure decreases. CFF also becomes larger as a test spot approaches the figure. However, Ogasawara (1961) indicates that the two results are opposing each other in terms of light sensitivity. In a previous report (this Journal, 1967, 33, 1-13) this contradiction was explained on the basis of the results of measurements of On-and Off-responses in the human fovea. At the same time the present writer proposed a hypothesis that light sensitivity possesses two aspects, τ and κ (τ-sensitivity is generally measured in terms of light threshold, and κ-sensitivity in terms of CFF). The purpose of the present study is to test whether or not various characteristics of the illusion of concentric circles are explained on the basis of the above hypothesis. The important characteristics of the illusion explained are as follows. 1. The displacement effect of inner circle is positive. 2. The displacement effect of outer circle is negative. 3. The amount of the displacement effect increases with the increase of the distance between the outer and inner circles up to a certain point and then gradually diminishes. 4. The amount of the displacement effect of the inner circle, in general, is greater than that of the outer circle. 5. The maximum displacement effect appears when the ratio of the diameters of the concentric circles is about 2:3.