This paper reports the results of a single subject study of an adult with sensory defensiveness. Psychophysiological measurements were used to assess the subject's autonomic responsiveness to touch, visual and auditory stimulation. As treatment, the subject self-administered firm tactile input which was, according to sensory integrative principles, expected to have a calming effect. Autonomic responses measured throughout the treatment period were compared to baseline responses. Significant changes in respiration rate, hand temperature and amplitude of skin conductance responses reflected reduced autonomic arousal. The study provides support for 1) the relationship of sensory defensiveness to autonomic arousal, 2) the potential for normalization of autonomic responses following treatment and 3) the use of psychophysiological measures in efficacy studies of sensory defensiveness.
AndreassiJ.L. (1980). Psychophysiology. New York: Oxford University Press.
2.
AyresA.J. (1964). Tactile functions: Their relation to hyperactive and perceptual motor behavior. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 18, 6–11.
3.
AyresA.J. (1972). Sensory integration and learning disorders. Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services.
4.
AyresA.J. (1979). Sensory integration and the child. Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services.
5.
AyresA.J., (1988). The sensory integration and praxis tests. Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services.
6.
BauerB.A. (1977). Tactile sensitivity: Development of a behavioral responses checklist. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 31, 357–361.
7.
CoolS.J. (1990). Use of a surgical brush in treatment of sensory defensiveness: Commentary and exploration. Sensory Integration Special Interest Section Newsletter, 13, (4), 4–6.
8.
DavidS.K. (1990a). A case study of sensory affective disorder in adult psychiatry. Sensory Integration Special Interest Section Newsletter, 13, (4), 1–4.
9.
DavidS.K. (1990b). Environment: Implications for occupational therapy in mental health. In MerrillS.C. (Ed.), Environment: Implications for occupational therapy practice. Rockville, MD: American Occupational Therapy Association.
10.
DrescherV.M.WhiteheadW.E.Morrill-CorbinE.D.CataldoM.F. (1985). Physiological and subjective reactions to being touched. Psychophysiology, 22, 96–100.
11.
DunnW.FisherA.G. (1983). Sensory registration, autism and tactile defensiveness. Sensory Integration Special Interest Section Newsletter, 6, (2), 3–4.
12.
FisherA.G.DunnW. (1983). Tactile defensiveness: Historical perspectives, new research — a theory grows. Sensory Integration Special Interest Section Newsletter, 6, (2), 1–2.
13.
FrickS. (1989). Sensory defensiveness: A case study. Sensory Integration Special Interest Section Newsletter, 12, (2), 4–6.
14.
IaconoW.G.LykkenD.T. (1983). The effects of instructions on electrodermal habituation. Psychophysiology, 20, 71–80.
15.
King-ThomasL.HackerB.J. (1987). A therapist's guide to pediatric assessment. Boston: Little, Brown.
16.
KnickerbockerB.M. (1980). A holistic approach to the treatment of learning disorders. Thorofare, NJ: Slack.
17.
KraussK.E. (1987). The effects of deep pressure touch on anxiety. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 41, 366–373.
18.
LarsonK.A. (1982). The sensory history of developmentally delayed children with and without tactile defensiveness. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 36, 590–596.
19.
MoltenoC.D.CompstyP. (1984). Tactile aversion in infancy. South African Medical Journal, 65, 773–774.
20.
MontgomeryP.RichterE. (1977). Sensory integration for developmentally disabled children: A handbook. Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services.
21.
OliverB.F. (1990). The social and emotional issues of adults with sensory defensiveness. Sensory Integration Special Interest Section Newsletter, 13, (3), 1–3.
22.
OttenbacherK.J. (1986). Evaluating clinical change: Strategies for occupational and physical therapists. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins.
23.
ReismanJ.E.FeeneyR.M. (1990). It doesn't have to hurt: Treating sensory integrative dysfunction in an occupational therapy student. Sensory Integration Special Interest Section Newsletter, 13, (1), 1–3.
24.
RoyeenC.B. (1985). Domain specifications of the construct tactile defensiveness. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 39, 596–599.
25.
RoyeenC.B. (1986). The development of a touch scale for measuring tactile defensiveness in children. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 40, 414–419.
26.
RoyeenC.B. (1987). TIP — Touch inventory for preschoolers: A pilot study. Physical & Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics, 7, 29–40.
27.
RoyeenC.B.FortuneJ.C. (1990). Touch inventory for elementary-school-aged children. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 44, 155–159.
28.
RoyeenC.B.LaneS.J. (1991). Tactile processing and sensory defensiveness. In FisherA.G.MurrayE.A.BundyA.C. (Eds.), Sensory integration: Theory and practice (pp. 108–133). Philadelphia: F.A. Davis.
29.
SearsC.J. (1981). The tactilely defensive child. Academic Therapy, 16, 563–569.
30.
SternR.M.RayW.M.DavisC.M. (1980). Psychophysiological recording. New York: Oxford University Press.
31.
WaltzC.F.StricklandO.L.LenzE.R. (1991). Measurement in nursing research. Philadelphia: F.A. Davis.
32.
WilbargerP.WilbargerJ.L. (1988, April). Sensory affective disorders: Beyond tactile defensiveness. Symposium conducted in St. Paul, MN.
33.
WilbargerP.WilbargerJ.L. (1991). Sensory defensiveness in children aged 2–12: An intervention guide for parents and other caretakers. Santa Barbara, CA: Avanti Educational Programs.
