Cited by 49Psychometric Methodologies and TestingHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic ControlPsychological Testing and Assessment

Covariation and consistency of activation parameters

Fahrenberg, Jochen, Foerster, Friedrich·1982·Biological Psychology

Abstract

Individual differences in activation processes, as well as the consistency and predictability of these differences, constitute a classical issue eliciting much theoretical discussion in this field and as such poses an essential question for any practical application of psychophysiological methods. A typical activation experiment assessing 125 male students on four self-report and 21 physiological measures under five conditions (rest, mental arithmetic, interview, anticipation and blood taking) was performed supplying an empirical basis for a multivariate analysis. A partition of covariance, factor analyses, item analyses and scale construction procedures as well as models engaging an increasing number of components were used to study the covariation and consistency of these activation parameters. Several biometric problems that are generally thought to complicate the evaluation of such data (i.e. non-linear relations, the problem of initial values, differing sensibility curves of physiological response systems, individual response specificities) are considered and tested empirically. Findings suggest that the use of a single variable or a composite measure as an 'indicator' of individual differences in state or reaction aspects of activation is inadequate, due to empirical inconsistency and the lack of predictability between functional subsystems. A multicomponent model or a set of marker variables, having empirically derived discriminative efficiency as well as reliability e…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0301-0511(82)90039-4

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Correlations between different psychophysiological measurements are often low or even nonexistent, thus questioning the arousal concept.

    “However, correlations between different psychophysiological measurements are often low or even nonexistent (see Fahrenberg and Foerster, 1982;Stemmler, 1992), thus questioning the arousal concept.”

    From Physiological feelings (2019) · cites this paper as Fahrenberg and Foerster, 1982

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 18 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fahrenberg, J., & Foerster, F.
Affiliations
University of Freiburg (DE)
Corresponding author
Fahrenberg, Jochen
Venue
Biological Psychology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1982-11
Volume
15
Issue
3-4
Pages
151-169
ISSN
0301-0511 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2021382844
Cited by
49
References
18
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 5
FWCI
3.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Biological Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
Keywords
individual differences, activation parameters, covariation, psychophysiological measures, self-report measures, multivariate analysis, factor analysis, item analysis, scale development, multicomponent model, reliability statistics, mental activation
MeSH terms
Analysis of Variance, Arousal, Blood Pressure, Electroencephalography, Electromyography, Heart Rate, Humans, Personality, Psychophysiology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review