Pineles Suzanne L, Orr Matthew R, Orr Scott P
National Center for PTSD, Women's Health Sciences Division, VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Psychophysiology. 2009 Sep;46(5):984-95. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2009.00852.x. Epub 2009 Jun 22.
Researchers examining skin conductance (SC) as a measure of aversive conditioning commonly separate the SC response into two components when the CS-UCS interval is sufficiently long. This convention drew from early theorists who described these components, the first- and second-interval responses, as measuring orienting and conditional responses, respectively. The present report critically examines this scoring method through a literature review and a secondary data analysis of a large-scale study of police and firefighter trainees that used a differential aversive conditioning procedure (n=287). The task included habituation, acquisition, and extinction phases, with colored circles as the CSs and shocks as the UCS. Results do not support the convention of separating the SC response into first- and second-interval responses. It is recommended that SC response scores be derived from data obtained across the entire CS-UCS interval.
研究人员将皮肤电导率(SC)作为厌恶条件作用的一种测量方法,当条件刺激(CS)与非条件刺激(UCS)的间隔足够长时,他们通常会将SC反应分为两个成分。这种惯例源于早期的理论家,他们将这些成分,即第一间隔反应和第二间隔反应,分别描述为测量定向反应和条件反应。本报告通过文献综述和对一项使用差异厌恶条件作用程序的警察和消防员学员大规模研究(n = 287)的二次数据分析,对这种评分方法进行了批判性审视。该任务包括习惯化、习得和消退阶段,以彩色圆圈作为CS,电击作为UCS。结果不支持将SC反应分为第一间隔反应和第二间隔反应的惯例。建议从整个CS - UCS间隔获得的数据中得出SC反应分数。