Cited by 249Heart Rate Variability and Autonomic ControlEmotion and Mood RecognitionDeception detection and forensic psychology

Standardization Within Individuals: A Simple Method to Neutralize Individual Differences in Skin Conductance

Ben‐Shakhar, Gershon·1985·Psychophysiology

Abstract

The present paper suggests a method to neutralize individual differences in skin conductance responsivity. The method suggested is a standardization of the responses within individuals. This method was compared to the range correction transformation suggested previously. The comparison was based on data from two experiments which evaluated differences between electrodermal responses to relevant and neutral stimuli in information detection tasks. In the first experiment the range correction transformation used the maximal skin conductance response evoked by the subject to one of the regular stimuli presented in the information detection task. The second experiment included responses to unpleasant tones and the range correction transformation was defined as the skin conductance response evoked by the subject to a given stimulus, divided by the response to the unpleasant stimulus. A bootstrap analysis was carried out on five data sets gathered from the two experiments, to statistically compare the transformations. In all cases standard scores better discriminated relevant and neutral stimuli, than range corrected scores. The advantage of standardization was much more salient in the second experiment, where only standard scores produced a statistically significant difference between strong and weak experimental conditions. The analysis demonstrated that the advantage of the method of standard scores is related mainly to its reliance upon the mean, which is a more stable and reliable statistic than the maximal response.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1469-8986.1985.tb01603.x

Cites

19 of 19 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?

  • SCR magnitudes were square root transformed and z-scored within-subjects to control for interindividual differences in skin conductance responsiveness.

    “SCR magnitudes were square root transformed to reduce skew and z-scored within-subjects to control for interindividual differences in skin conductance responsiveness (Ben-Shakhar, 1985).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ben‐Shakhar, G.
Affiliations
Hebrew University of Jerusalem (IL)
Corresponding author
Ben‐Shakhar, Gershon
Venue
Psychophysiology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1985-05
Volume
22
Issue
3
Pages
292-299
ISSN
  • 0048-5772 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8986
OpenAlex
W2045186928
Cited by
249
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 7
FWCI
2.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychophysiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Emotion and Mood Recognition
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Deception detection and forensic psychology
Keywords
skin conductance, electrodermal activity, individual differences, Z-score, information detection
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Child, Galvanic Skin Response, Humans, Individuality

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