ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Habituation of Central and Electrodermal Responses to an Auditory Two-Stimulus Oddball Paradigm.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Elicitation and habituation of the electrodermal activity responses: Implications for neurophysiological applications.Journal of electrical bioimpedance · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The orienting reaction (OR) towards a new stimulus is subject to habituation, i.e., progressively attenuates with stimulus repetition. The skin conductance responses (SCRs) are known to represent a reliable measure of OR at the peripheral level. Yet, it is still a matter of debate which of the P3 subcomponents is the most likely to represent the central counterpart of the OR. The aim of the present work was to study habituation, recovery, and dishabituation phenomena intrinsic to a two-stimulus auditory oddball paradigm, one of the most-used paradigms both in research and clinic, by simultaneously recording SCRs and P3 in twenty healthy volunteers. Our findings show that the target stimulus was capable of triggering a more marked OR, as indexed by both SCRs and P3, compared to the standard stimulus, that could be due to its affective saliency and relevance for task completion; the application of temporal principal components analysis (PCA) to the P3 complex allowed us to identify several subcomponents including both early and late P3a (eP3a; lP3a), P3b, novelty P3 (nP3), and both a positive and a negative Slow Wave (+SW; -SW). Particularly, lP3a and P3b subcomponents showed a similar behavior to that observed for SCRs , suggesting them as central counterparts of OR. Finally, the P3 evoked by the first standard stimulus after the target showed a significant dishabituation phenomenon which could represent a sign of the local stimulus change. However, it did not reach a sufficient level to trigger an SCR/OR since it did not represent a salient event in the context of the task.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.