Dependence of EDR Recovery Times and Other Electrodermal Measures on Scale of Measurement: A Methodological Clarification
- 1 September 1980
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Psychophysiology
- Vol. 17 (5) , 506-509
- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.1980.tb00192.x
Abstract
Edelberg (1970) and Boucsein and Hoffmann (1979) found shorter recovery times with a constant voltage method as compared with a constant current method. In the present paper it is pointed out that this effect may be due to the use of different scales of measurement rather than to any electrophysiological aspects of the recording procedure. The mathematical relationship between resistance and conductance implies that recovery times are shorter for SCRs than for corresponding SRRs. For demonstration purposes, recovery times were computed from an SR record and compared with those computed from the same record after computerized transformation to SC. Research implications of the demonstrated effect are discussed, and the relevance of measurement scale to two other electrodermal measures, area below the curve and range‐corrected amplitude, is pointed out.Keywords
This publication has 5 references indexed in Scilit:
- A Direct Comparison of the Skin Conductance and Skin Resistance MethodsPsychophysiology, 1979
- Skin Conductance Recovery in Antisocial AdolescentsBritish Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 1976
- Electrodermal Recovery Rate in a Schizophrenic PopulationPsychophysiology, 1975
- Interrelations Between Amplitude, Latency, Rise Time, and the Edelberg Recovery Measure of the Galvanic Skin ResponsePsychophysiology, 1972
- THE INFORMATION CONTENT OF THE RECOVERY LIMB OF THE ELECTRODERMAL RESPONSEPsychophysiology, 1970