Effects of operant reinforcement on the GSR.

MANDLER et al. (1962) asked if a tiny light could make skin reflexes happen more often. They wired adults to watch drops in skin resistance, called the GSR. Each 500-ohm drop turned on a brief light.

The team ran single-case tests. They counted how many drops happened before, during, and after the light was given.

The light helped only the adults who started with very few drops. Their drop rate went up a little. Adults who already had many drops did not change.

The rise looked more like general arousal than true operant conditioning. When reinforcement stopped, the drops quickly returned to start levels.

Kohlenberg (1973) later showed clear operant control of another reflex: anal-sphincter pressure in a boy. The same logic worked there, so the failure here is response-specific, not a flaw in the theory.

Russell et al. (2018) moved from weak lights to strong tokens. Tokens kept children working even after they had eaten, proving that conditioned reinforcers can be powerful when they are meaningful and exchangeable.

Quilitch (1975) gave single candy rewards for sitting. The whole preschool class sat more, peers included. Together these studies say: pick a response you can truly reinforce, and use a reinforcer the learner actually wants.

Do not waste sessions trying to shape reflexes that barely budge. If baseline GSR is already high, added light will do little. Choose clear, observable responses and strong backup reinforcers instead. Tokens, praise, or edibles beat a dim lamp every time.