Search

Some psychological and physiological reactions to introduction of chlordiazepoxide hydrochloride to an experimental situation involving a conformity trial were investigated. Groups of four subjects were selected with either considerable previous acquaintance (Friends) or little acquaintance (Strangers). In each group, two subjects were given an injection of the drug and two an injection of saline. Conformity to false group feedback was measured on a Crutchfield-Gerard apparatus and arousal was measured in terms of the plasma free fatty acid (FFA) level. Selfratings of mood were obtained using the Nowlis Adjective Check List. It was found that the experimental manipulations of group composition or drug injection did not yield clear-cut results unless the subjects were divided according to initial ratings of anxiety. Subjects initially more anxious, who were administered the drug and who were tested as Strangers, showed greater conformity to group pressure and a continuous increase in physiological arousal. These conditions were interpreted as being cumulative sources of strain, under which subjects concentrate on monitoring themselves to the exclusion of attending to surrounding events. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In investigating the possible factors which may determine experimental stress, the authors concentrated on the in-between times. Experimental stress has its source in the discomforts inherent in the experiment the newness and ambiguity of the situation or the uncomfortable experience of being observed. These are factors which are introduced into the experimental situation, not as experimental variables, but because they are necessary to the experimental process. These intrinsic as opposed to experimental variables would represent those aspects of the situation which the subjects react to in the global fashion described above and would be measurable at the physiological level. In previous experiments in laboratory, the authors have found that the stress stemming from the subject's entry into the experiment and to the reading of experimental instructions was greater for them than other stresses which occurred later when reacting to the task and experimental conditions. It is not reasonable to expect correspondence between measures derived at these two levels.