Recognition thresholds and maximum accuracy levels were established on 12 Ss as a function of number of electrodes (2, 3, 4, and 5) and inter-electrode distance for various body regions (chest, abdomen, and back). There was little systematic difference among body regions with respect to the threshold and accuracy data; however, the number of electrodes proved to be significant. The abdomen appeared to be a slightly more favorable electrode site with a 5-electrode array.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AttneaveF.Applications of information theory to psychology. New York: Holt, 1959.
2.
BekesyG.A new audiometer. Acta Oto-laryngol., 1947, 35, 411–422.
3.
BloughD. S.A method for obtaining psychophysical thresholds from the pigeon. J. exp. Anal. Behav., 1958, 1, 31–43.
4.
BrownR. L., SpernR. A., SchmittK., & SolomonA.Stimulus parameter considerations and individual differences in cutaneous sensitivity to electropulse stimulation. Percept. mot. Skills, 1966, 23, 1215–1222.
5.
EdwardsA. L.Experimental design in psychological research. New York: Rinehart, 1950.
6.
GarnerW. R.Uncertainty and structure as psychological concepts. New York: Wiley, 1962.
7.
GibsonR. H.Electrical stimulation of pain and touch systems. Nature, 1963, 199 (4890), 307.-308.
8.
GilmerB. V. H.Possibilities of cutaneous electro-pulse communications. in G. R. Hawkes (Ed.), Symposium on cutaneous sensitivity. Usa Med. Res. Lab. Rep., 1960, No. 424.
9.
OldfieldR. C.Continuous recording of sensory thresholds and other psychophysical variables. Nature, 1949, 164, 581.
10.
OldfieldR. C.Apparent fluctuations of a sensory threshold. Quart. J. exp. Psychol., 1955, 7, 101–115.
