Diaz C C, Carlson J G
J Behav Med. 1984 Jun;7(2):231-46. doi: 10.1007/BF00845389.
In a comparison among relaxation procedures, 32 college students were assigned to four group of equal size. Electromyographic response training was given with biofeedback (EMG training) on the forehead (frontal area) alone, on the frontal area, neck (sternomastoid), and forearm areas in succession, or on these three sites in conjunction with recorded relaxation instructions used at home. Relative to a control group, which received no training, the three biofeedback-trained groups maintained lower EMG levels on the frontal and sternomastoid sites, and the group provided with the relaxation instructions plus EMG training showed lower skin conductance levels. These patterns were generally maintained during the presentation of a stimulus (stressor) that ostensibly signaled an impending electric shock. Other measures, including peripheral temperatures and self-reported anxiety, also showed effects consistent with the stressor presentations but did not differentiate the groups. The results are discussed in terms of common clinical relaxation procedures, an alternative procedure for training several sites simultaneously, and implications for models of EMG training and arousal.
在一项针对放松程序的比较研究中，32名大学生被分成四组，每组人数相等。分别对他们进行了以下训练：仅在前额（额叶区域）进行伴有生物反馈的肌电图反应训练（肌电图训练）；在前额区域、颈部（胸锁乳突肌）和前臂区域依次进行肌电图训练；或者在这三个部位进行肌电图训练的同时，结合在家中使用的录制好的放松指导语。与未接受任何训练的对照组相比，接受三种生物反馈训练的组在前额和胸锁乳突肌部位保持较低的肌电图水平，而接受放松指导语加肌电图训练的组皮肤电导率水平较低。在呈现一种表面上预示即将遭受电击的刺激（应激源）期间，这些模式通常得以维持。包括外周温度和自我报告的焦虑在内的其他指标，也显示出与应激源呈现一致的效应，但并未区分出不同的组。本文从常见的临床放松程序、同时训练多个部位的替代程序以及对肌电图训练和唤醒模型的影响等方面对研究结果进行了讨论。
