Physiological Responses to Mild Heteromodal Sensory Stimulation

Abstract

The interaction of three pairs of heteromodal sensory stimuli-^reading vs. continuous banging noise, continuous flashing light vs. banging noise, single flash vs. bang-were evaluated. Order of presentation was confounded both within (with multiple trials) and between subjects. Interstimulus time periods were 15 sec with the first two stimulus pairs, and varied from 15 to 0 sec with the last. Although most variables had large mean differences in the expected direction, the largest and most often significant effects were with GSR. In all cases, the responses were less with a stimulus imposed either simultaneously or within a short period (up to 15 sec at least) after another, than they were to the stimulus imposed alone. Habituation effects were marked.

Mechanisms, Instrumentation, Recording Techniques, and Quantification of Responses

“…1. The range of expected response amplitude is from .01 /*mho to 5 /^mho/cm 2 , latencies will be from 1.3 to 2.5 sec (see, for example, Mefferd, Sadler, & Wieland, 1969;Surwillo, 1967). The range of expected response amplitude is from .01 /*mho to 5 /^mho/cm 2 , latencies will be from 1.3 to 2.5 sec (see, for example, Mefferd, Sadler, & Wieland, 1969;Surwillo, 1967).…”

Generalization of GSR Habituation to Mild Intramodal Stimuli

“…Basal skin resistance (BSR), GSRs, and respiration were measured as described earlier (Mefferd, Sadler, & Wieland, 1969). The skin resistance electrodes were attached 20 min before the test to permit hydration of the skin.…”