Generalization of GSR Habituation to Mild Intramodal Stimuli

Houck, Robert L.; Mefferd, Roy B.

doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.1969.tb02900.x

Cited by 24 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A presentation of an unexpected number (e.g., 21, 22, 23,..., 600) did not produce an enhanced electrodermal response. Houck and Mefferd (1969) obtained a significant increase in electrodermal responsivity to a stimulus change only across but not within stimulus modality. Furthermore, Bernstein (1969) indicated that even in experiments in which a stimulus change did produce an OR, there were marked individual differences, and in many subjects the effect of stimulus change was not observed.…”

mentioning

confidence: 86%

Novelty and significance in orientation and habituation: A feature-matching approach.

Gati¹,

Ben‐Shakhar²

1990

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

112

121

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A feature-matching model to account for the effects of novelty and significance on psychophysiological responsivity is presented. 2 experiments based on a modified version of the Guilty Knowledge Technique were designed to test predictions derived from the proposed model. Results of Experiment 1 demonstrated that electrodermal responsivity to the test stimulus reflected the degree to which the subjects were habituated to its components. Experiment 2 provided additional support for the proposed model and suggested that the effects of novelty and significance were additive. These findings support the hypothesis that responsivity is positively related to the degree of match between the input and the representation of significance, and it is negatively related to the similarity between the input and the preceding stimuli. It is argued that the proposed model clarifies the processes involved in orienting response elicitation.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 86%

Novelty and significance in orientation and habituation: A feature-matching approach.

Gati¹,

Ben‐Shakhar²

1990

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

112

121

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Changes in stimuli are ultimately more important than the actual content of stimuli in determining the characteristics of the OR and habituation. When a series of stimuli is presented in one sensory modality (e.g., visual) and is then switched to another modality (e.g., sound), there is a large recovery of the OR (Furedy, 1968;Houck & Mefferd, 1969). Changes in tone, stimulus intensity, stimulus duration, stimulus omission, and word meaning have been shown to cause the reemergence of the OR (see Siddle et al, 1983, for a review).…”

Section: Stimulus Uncertainty and Changementioning

confidence: 99%

The Neuropsychology of Attention

Cohen

1993

Critical Issues in Neuropsychology

210

118

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A Continuation Order Plan is available for this series. A continuation order will bring delivery of each new volume immediately upon publication. Volumes are billed only upon actual shipment. For further information please contact the publisher.Originally published by Plenum Press, New York in 1993 Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1st edition 1993All rights reserved No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming, recording, or otherwise, without written permission from the Publisher An unfortunate case of "hemispatial" inattention. ("M Babinet prevenu par sa portiere de Ia visite de Ia comete." From Le Charivari, 1858, by Honore Daumier. Babcock Bequest; Courtesy of Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, Massachusetts.) PrefaceAt the beginning of this project, I was struck by several paradoxes regarding the study of attentional phenomena within neuropsychology. On one hand, the concept of attention has been central to the historical development of psychology. Attention was considered a fundamental and inescapable aspect of human experience by Wilhelm Wundt, William James, and the other founders of modern psychology. On the other hand, for much of the 20th century, psychologists tried desperately to avoid acknowledging the need for an attentional construct. Because attention has an intangible quality and cannot be specified as a unitary process, many behavioral scientists considered the construct of attention theoretically incoherent. Some of their concerns regarding the nature of attentional phenomena were clearly justified. It is also apparent, however, that explanations of behavior and cognition that fail to account for attentional phenomena cannot fully capture human experience.Recently, there has been a shift in zeitgeist, and attention has received more favorable treatment within the cognitive neurosciences. Humans cannot handle an infinite amount of simultaneous information. Therefore, cognitive processes must exist that direct our focus to information that is important, and that permit the selection of stimuli and responses from the large universe of alternatives. Regardless of whether one advocates the existence of a discrete attentional process, it is necessary to account for the occurrence of those phenomena that we normally label as aspects of attention. Consideration of the mechanisms underlying the selection of information and the control of stimulus and response processes is critical if we hope to understand human cognitive experience.The necessity of studying the mechanisms underlying attentional phenomena is particularly evident within neuropsychology. Patients with brain disorders frequently do not perform at optimal levels, even when task variables are held constant. They may fail to detect an object in the environment, even though it can be demonstrated that they have adequate perceptual capability. Reference to performance deficits stemming from attentional dysfunction is common in cl...

show abstract

“…Indeed, with the accumulation of research data, more instances were reported in which a change in stimulation failed to evoke an OR~e.g., Bernstein, 1969;Furedy, 1968;Houck & Mefferd, 1969;Zimny, Pawlick, & Saur, 1969!. It is difficult to determine whether these instances should be interpreted as refutations of Sokolov's theory, because it is not clear whether a given change in stimulation was insufficient to create an orientation, or whether the fact that the change did not produce a response is an indication that the whole comparator approach is invalid.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Orienting response reinstatement and dishabituation: Effects of substituting, adding, and deleting components of nonsignificant stimuli

et al. 2000

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The prediction that orienting response (OR) reinstatement is negatively related to the measure of common features, shared by the stimulus input and representations of preceding events, and positively related to the measure of their distinctive features, was examined. A nonsignificant test stimulus (TS) was presented after nine repetitions of a standard stimulus (SS), followed by two additional repetitions of SS. TS was created by either substituting 0, 1, or 2 components of SS (Experiment 1), or by either adding or deleting 0, 1, or 2 components of SS (Experiment 2). Skin conductance changes to TS (OR reinstatement) and the subsequent SS (dishabituation) were used as dependent measures. The results of Experiment 1 supported the prediction that substituting components of neutral stimuli affects OR reinstatement, with a larger effect for between-categories than within-categories substitution. Experiment 2 demonstrated that adding and deleting components similarly affects OR reinstatement.

show abstract

Generalization of GSR Habituation to Mild Intramodal Stimuli

Cited by 24 publications

References 6 publications

Novelty and significance in orientation and habituation: A feature-matching approach.

Novelty and significance in orientation and habituation: A feature-matching approach.

The Neuropsychology of Attention

Orienting response reinstatement and dishabituation: Effects of substituting, adding, and deleting components of nonsignificant stimuli

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About