The human startle response is a sensitive, noninvasive measure of central nervous system activity that is currently used in a wide variety of research and clinical settings. In this article, we raise methodological issues and present recommendations for optimal methods of startle blink electromyographic (EMG) response elicitation, recording, quantification, and reporting. It is hoped that this report will foster more methodological validity and reliability in research using the startle response, as well as increase the detail with which relevant methodology is reported in publications using this measure. Descriptors: Startle, Blink, Electromyographic (EMG), HumanDue to the dramatic increase in the use of the startle blink response in research and clinical settings, Gregory Miller, then Editor of Psychophysiology (2001), appointed a committee to consider guidelines for startle blink research in humans. The result is this article, the aim of which is to propose a series of suggestions that might guide researchers in the collection and reporting of data based on the blink component of the startle response. Due to space limitations, this article will not deal with several areas of interest to startle researchers, such as affect, attention, psychopathology, and prepulse inhibition, but will instead focus on the fundamental methodology applied when startle blink electromyographic (EMG) data are used to investigate any research question. One goal of this article is to bring a higher degree of both reliability and validity to this research area by summarizing recent research in which alternative methods have been compared and by providing criteria for choosing among them. Another goal is to encourage the reporting of relevant methodological details in publications in this area of research. We hope that this article will serve as a guide for researchers new to the area of startle, showing them the potential ramifications of deciding to do things one way rather than another. Moreover, experienced researchers may benefit from a review of the methodological advances that have been made in this area over the past few years, and may even reconsider some of their current practices.

The current study examined emotional reactivity in nonsuicidal self-injurers and noninjuring controls using self-report (the Emotional Reactivity Scale: ERS) and psychophysiological measures (the startle reflex was measured during and after the presentation of IAPS images). Self-injurers reported greater emotional reactivity on the ERS, but did not exhibit differences in startle modulation during or after picture viewing compared to controls. Results suggest a divergence between self-report and psychophysiological measures of emotion in NSSI.

No abstract

No abstract

Several methods of quantifying prepulse inhibition (PPI) of eyeblink responding were compared in adult volunteers. Blink-eliciting stimuli were noise bursts at 85 or 100 dB, and prepulses were also noise bursts, at 55 or 70 dB and lead intervals of 60 or 120 ms. PPI was evaluated by comparing reactivity on prepulse and control trials within participants using the following methods: (1) difference between reactivity on prepulse and control trials; (2) reactivity on prepulse trials divided by that on control trials (proportion of control); (3) difference between reactivity on prepulse and control trials, divided by that on control trials (proportion of the difference from control); (4) range correction (maximum minus minimum reactivity, divided by the range of reactivity), across all control and prepulse trials; (5) z scores across all prepulse and control trials. Prepulses inhibited eyeblink response magnitude in all cases. Proportion of difference was the method least affected by differences in control reactivity, and is the preferred method to use when quantifying PPI, both from a practical and a neurophysiological perspective.