Some new speculative ideas about the “behavioral homeostasis theory” as to how the simple learned behaviors of habituation and sensitization improve organism survival throughout phylogeny

Figures & data

Figure 1. (A) The GSR consists of the difference function derived by subtracting the palmar skin conductance level (SCL) immediately before stimulus onset from the highest palmar skin conductance level (SCL) reached within 10 sec after stimulus onset for each subject on each trial. The SCL is measured in micro-Siemens (µS). This is a well established method for recording the GSR.^4,26,30 (Habituaters: n = 40; Sensitizers: n = 6). The standard error of the mean (SEM) is shown on each trial for all four effector systems. (B) The finger pulse volume decrease (FPV) to a stimulus is measured as the difference between the log of the mean micro-liters per stroke of the two pulses just preceding the stimulus minus the log of the mean micro-liters per stroke of the smallest two consecutive pulse waves occurring within 30 sec after the stimulus onset. This difference is a measure of the degree of vasoconstriction for each subject on each trial.³⁰ (Habituaters: n = 21; Sensitizers: n = 20). (C) The muscle frontalis (forehead) potential increase (MF) consists of the difference in magnitude between the average height of several consecutive potentials just prior to the stimulus onset and the average height of the largest consecutive potentials occurring within 30 sec following the stimulus. This difference, post-stimulus magnitude minus pre-stimulus magnitude in micro-volts (ΔμV), constitutes the response measure for each subject on each trial.³⁰ (Habituaters: n = 18. Sensitizers n = 21). (D) The heart rate increase (HR) to the stimulus is measured as the difference between the highest rate (shortest R-R interval within 30 sec after stimulus onset) and the immediate pre-stimulus rate for each subject on each trial.³⁰ (Habituaters: n = 14; Sensitizers: n = 28).

Table 1. Number of subjects showing habituation, sensitization or no change in each effector system from trial 1 to trial 2

	Habituation	Sensitization	No Change	Total
GSR	40	6	1	47
FPV	21	20	2	43
MF	18	21	2	41
HR	14	28	3	45

Table 1 shows the number of subjects showing habituation, sensitization or no change, from tone-alone trial 1 to trial 2, in all four effector systems. As shown, there is no consistency between the number of subjects who initially habituated and sensitized in the GSR, and the number of subjects who initially habituated and sensitized in each of the other effector systems. Occasionally, due to technical problems, data were not available for a given subject on the first or second trial in a given effector system leading to differences in the total number of subjects shown for each effector system.

Boucsein W. Electrodermal activity. New York: Plenum Press, 1992.

 Google Scholar

Lykken DT, Venables PH. Direct measurement of skin conductance: a proposal for standardization. Psychophysiology 1971; 8:656 - 72; http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.1971.tb00501.x; PMID: 5116830

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Wenger MA, Engel BT, Clemens TL. Studies of autonomic response patterns: Rationale and methods. Behav Sci 1957; 2:216 - 21; http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bs.3830020304

 Google Scholar