Stimulus control of skin resistance responses on an escape-avoidance schedule.

Eight adults sat in a quiet lab. A tone sounded. If their skin resistance did not drop quickly, a mild shock came on.

The shock stopped the moment their skin moistness changed. After several trials, a second tone meant no shock would come.

Researchers watched if the adults learned to change skin moisture only when the first tone played.

All eight adults learned to change skin moisture when the danger tone sounded.

Seven adults got faster and more accurate as the session moved on. Their bodies showed clear stimulus control.

BAER (1960) did the same thing with preschool kids. Instead of shock, the kids lost candy for slow responses. Both studies prove escape-avoidance works with humans.

Konstantareas et al. (1999) took the idea into a clinic. They mapped the exact task cues that set off escape tantrums in children with autism. The 1971 lab result laid the groundwork for that real-world use.

Zeiler (1968) trained rats to hold and release a bar under the same schedule. The rat study and the human skin study show the same contingency works across species and response types.

You now know that even tiny autonomic responses can come under tight stimulus control. When a client’s heart rate, breathing, or skin moisture signals stress, you can set up clear SDs and S-deltas to shape calmer reactions. Try pairing a short tone or visual cue with safe moments, and withhold the cue when danger is real. The body learns the difference, just like those adults in 1971.