Task instructions as a determiner of the GSR index of the orienting reflex

Maltzman, Irving; Gould, Jay E.; Pendery, Mary; Wolff, Craig

doi:10.3758/bf03332942

Cited by 7 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 15 publications

(18 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The two factors that determine OR according the proposed model may correspond to the two types of OR mentioned by Maltzman and his colleagues (e.g., Maltzman, Gould, Pendry, & Wolff, 1982; Maltzman, Vincent, & Wolff, 1982). They made a distinction between voluntary and involuntary ORs: The latter is evoked by an unexpected novel stimulus, whereas the former reflects a response to a predictable stimulus—a stimulus for which expectations have been formed through instructions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Gati¹,

Ben‐Shakhar²

1990

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

112

118

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

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Gati¹,

Ben‐Shakhar²

1990

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

112

118

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Consequently, Naatanen made a distinction between the term orienting reflex, which refers to the involuntary, organismic response evoked by novel stimuli and the term orienting reaction for the longer latency, less automatic orienting responses. A similar conceptualization was made by Maltzman and his colleagues (e.g., Maltzman, Gould, et al, 1982;Maltzman, Vincent, & Wolff, 1982), who coined the term "involuntary OR" to describe the response evoked by an unexpected novel stimulus and the term "voluntary OR" to describe the response to a predictable (significant) stimulus (e.g., a stimulus for which expectations have been formed through instructions). A similar distinction was made by Ohman (1979) between what he termed as "signal OR" and "non-signal OR".…”

Section: Involuntary or Versus Voluntary Ormentioning

confidence: 87%

A new theoretical perspective on concealed information detection

Selle

Ben‐Shakhar

2022

Psychophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The concealed information test (CIT) was designed to detect concealed knowledge. It does so by measuring differential physiological and behavioral responses to concealed, compared to control, items -i.e., the CIT effect. Although the CIT has gained extensive empirical support in laboratory studies, scientific validity requires also a theoretical understanding of the method's underlying mechanisms.In this article, we present a new theoretical perspective. Specifically, we elaborate and clarify several features of Orienting Response (OR) theory, which has been the dominant theory in this domain. Importantly, we suggest for the first time that the voluntary (rather than the involuntary) OR modulates the CIT effect. Second, we argue that motivational-emotional accounts of the CIT effect are consistent with OR theory and cannot be considered as alternative approaches.Finally, we discuss some more recent developments which highlight the idea that different physiological measures reflect different underlying mechanisms -an idea dubbed as response fractionation.

show abstract

“…(e.g., Maltzman, Gould, Pendry, & Wolff, 1982;Maltzman, Vincent, & Wolff, 1982) distinguished between voluntary and involuntary ORs, the former reflecting a response to a predictable stimulus -a stimulus for which expectations have previously been formed -and the latter evoked by unexpected, novel stimuli. A similar distinction was made by Naatanen (1979), who noted that Sokolov's original theory cannot account for the activation of the OR by a familiar but significant .stimulus.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Generalization of the orienting response to significant stimuli: The roles of common and distinctive stimulus components

1995

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study focused on the effects of common and distinctive stimulus components on the generalization of the orienting response (OR) to significant stimuli. Compound pictorial stimuli were used as the relevant items memorized by the subjects. Skin conductance responses were measured during the subsequent presentation of a stimulus sequence that included a test stimulus that shared some common components with the relevant one. The two types of stimulus components (common and distinctive) were independently manipulated. As predicted by the feature-matching theory, both types of features affected OR generalization, but the distinctive components effect was due mainly to a large decline in OR with the introduction of the first distinctive component. As hypothesized, no interaction was observed between the effects of common and distinctive components. Contrary to expectations, similar OR generalization was obtained regardless of whether the test stimulus was constructed by deleting stimulus components from the relevant stimulus or by adding components to that stimulus.

show abstract

Task instructions as a determiner of the GSR index of the orienting reflex

Cited by 7 publications

References 15 publications

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

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

A new theoretical perspective on concealed information detection

Generalization of the orienting response to significant stimuli: The roles of common and distinctive stimulus components

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About