Wilhelm F H, Roth W T
Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California 94304, USA.
Psychophysiology. 1998 Sep;35(5):596-606. doi: 10.1017/s0048577298970196.
We evaluated the feasibility of recording multiple physiological anxiety measures during a flight and how well they could distinguish flight phobics from controls. Benefits of baseline adjustment and transformation for all variables and adjustment of heart rate by ventilation to give additional heart rate were calculated. Effect size, one measure of the power to discriminate groups, was between 1.1 and 1.7 for heart rate measures. Although respiratory rate and minute ventilation, indicators of hyperventilation, did not differ between groups, phobics paused more during inspiration than did controls. Phobics also showed more skin conductance fluctuations and less respiratory sinus arrhythmia. Self-reported anxiety was a more powerful discriminator than physiological measures, a result that may be partially explained by how phobics were selected. These results indicate that monitoring of multiple physiological systems outside the laboratory is practical and informative. Physiological measures of psychological importance can be quantified accurately in a noisy, changing, unsupervised ambulatory setting.
我们评估了在飞行过程中记录多种生理焦虑指标的可行性，以及这些指标区分飞行恐惧症患者与对照组的能力。计算了所有变量的基线调整和转换的益处，以及通过通气调整心率以得出额外心率的益处。作为区分组间能力的一种衡量指标，心率指标的效应大小在1.1至1.7之间。尽管作为过度通气指标的呼吸频率和每分钟通气量在两组之间没有差异，但恐惧症患者在吸气时的停顿比对照组更多。恐惧症患者还表现出更多的皮肤电导率波动和更少的呼吸性窦性心律不齐。自我报告的焦虑比生理指标更能有效区分，这一结果可能部分归因于恐惧症患者的选择方式。这些结果表明，在实验室之外监测多种生理系统是可行且有益的。具有心理重要性的生理指标可以在嘈杂、多变、无人监督的动态环境中准确量化。
