Perception & Psychophysics

, Volume 34, Issue 3, pp 214–220 | Cite as

Motor and cognitive factors in the modification of a reflex

  • Michelle E. Cohen
  • Jacquelyn Cranney
  • Howard S. Hoffman


By closing a hand-held switch, subjects caused a miniature solenoid to deliver a tap to their own foreheads. (1) The amplitude of elicited eyeblinks was reduced when the delay between switch closure and tap was 50 meec or less. (2) Subjects who expected that switch closure would produce an immediate tap exhibited smaller blinks to such taps than did subjects who expected switch closure to produce a delayed tap. (3) The inhibitory effects of a reflex-modifying tone prior to tap were the same when taps were self-presented as when they were presented by the experimenter. (4) When blinks could be elicited by either a tap or a loud noise, the smallest responses occurred when subjects knew which to expect. (5) On a given trial, the inhibition afforded by the particular stimulus, motor, and cognitive factors operating at the time tended to add in an algebraic fashion.


  1. Bjorkstrand, P.-A. Electrodermal responses as affected by subject versus experimenter controlled noxious stimulation.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1973,97, 365–369.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Dykman, B. M., &Ison, J. R. Temporal integration of acoustic stimulation obtained in reflex inhibition in rats and humans.Journal of Comparative & Physiological Psychology, 1979,93, 939–945.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Furedy, J. J., &Klajner, F. On evaluating autonomic and verbal indices of negative perception.Psychophysiology, 1974,11, 121–124.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Graham, F. K., &Murray, G. M. Discordant effects of weak prestimulation on magnitude and latency of the reflex blink.Physioiogical Psychology, 1977,5, 108–114.Google Scholar
  5. Grings, W. W. Preparatory set variables related to classical conditioning of autonomic responses.Psychological Review, 1960,67, 243–252.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Haggard, E. Some conditions determining adjustment during and readjustment following experimentally induced stress.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1943,33, 257–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hoffman, H. S., Cohen, M. E., &Stitt, C. L. Acoustic augmentation and inhibition of the human eyeblink.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 1981,7, 1357–1362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hoffman, H. S., &Iron, J. R. Reflex modification in the domain of startle: I. Some empirical findings and their implications for how the nervous system processes sensory input.Psychological Review, 1980,87, 175–189.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Ison, J. R., Zuckerman, M., &Russo, J. M. Combination rules for inhibitory stimuli.Journal of Experimental Psychology: AnimaI Behavior Processes, 1975,1, 318–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Krauter, E. E., Leonard, D. W., &Ison, J. R. Inhibition of the human eyeblink by a brief acoustic stimulus.Journal of Comparative & Physiological Psychology, 1973,2, 28–37.Google Scholar
  11. Lykken, D. T., &Tellegen, A. On the validity of the perception hypothesis.Psychophysiology, 1974,11, 125–132.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Maltzman, I., &Wolff, C. Preference for immediate versus delayed noxious stimulation and concomittant GSR.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1970,83, 76–79.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Marsh, R. R., &Hoffman, H. S. Eyeblink elicitation and measurement in the human infant: A circuit modification.Behavior Research Methods & Instrumentation, 1981,13, 707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Marsh, R. R., Hoffman, H. S., &Stitt, C. L. Eyeblink elicitation and measurement in the human infant.Behavior Research Methods& Instrumentation, 1979,11, 498–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Sanes, J. N.Excitability of cutaneous eyeblink reflex in humans during organization and performance of voluntary movements. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Rochester, 1979.Google Scholar
  16. Silverstein, L. D., &Graham, F. K. Obicularis oculi excitability and prestimulation effects during REM and NREM sleep.Psychophysiology, 1979,16, 177. (Abstract)Google Scholar
  17. Staub, E., Tursky, B., &Schwartz, G. E. Self-control and predictability: Their effects on reactions to aversive stimulation.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1971,18, 157–162.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Sternberg, S. The discovery of processing stages: Extensions of Donder’s method.Acta Psychologica, 1969,30, 276–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Stitt, C. L., Hoffman, H. S., Marsh, R. R., &Schwartz, G. M. Modification of the pigeon’s visual startle reaction by the sensory environment.Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1976,90, 601–619.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Yerkes, R. M. The sense of hearing in frogs.Journal of Comparative Neurology & Psychology, 1905,15, 279–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc 1983

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michelle E. Cohen
    • 1
  • Jacquelyn Cranney
    • 1
  • Howard S. Hoffman
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyBryn Mawr CollegeBryn Mawr

Personalised recommendations