Skip to main content

Abstract

There is no universally accepted experimental protocol for the validation of EDA analysis algorithms. A characterization in terms of sensitivity and specificity, as typically done in a pattern recognition framework, is not directly applicable in this context since there is no one-to-one correspondence between external stimuli supposed to elicit ANS responses and skin conductance responses (see Bach and Friston, Psychophysiology 50(1):15–22, 2013 for a discussion). Unless the sympathetic nerve activity is also recorded through microneurography, failure to detect a phasic SC response after the occurrence of an experimental stimulus may be equally ascribed to a low sensitivity of the algorithm under study or, alternatively, to the inability of the stimulus to consistently elicit a phasic response. Similarly, detection of phasic activity in the absence of stimulation may be caused by electrodermal changes that are not stimulus-elicited but spontaneous and non-specific, possibly a result of muscular contractions or respiratory irregularities (Boucsein, Electrodermal activity, 2nd edn. Springer Science & Business Media, New York, 2012).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Bibliography

  1. Benedek, M., & Kaernbach, C. (2010). A continuous measure of phasic electrodermal activity. Journal of neuroscience methods, 190(1), 80–91.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Boucsein, W. (2012). Electrodermal activity (2nd ed). New York: Springer Science & Business Media.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bach, D. R., & Friston, K. J. (2013). Model-based analysis of skin conductance responses: Towards causal models in psychophysiology. Psychophysiology, 50(1), 15–22.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Kira, Y., Ogura, T., Aramaki, S., Kubo, T., Hayasida, T., & Hirasawa, Y. (2001). Sympathetic skin response evoked by respiratory stimulation as a measure of sympathetic function. Clinical Neurophysiology, 112(5), 861–865.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Lang, P., Bradley, M., & Cuthbert, B. (2005). International affective picture system iaps): Digitized photographs, instruction manual and affective ratings. Technical Report A-6. University of Florida.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cook, E. W., Hawk, L. W., Davis, T. L., & Stevenson, V. E. (1991). Affective individual differences and startle reflex modulation. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 100(1), 5.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Lang, P., Greenwald, M., Bradley, M., & Hamm, A. (1993). Looking at pictures: Affective, facial, visceral, & behavioral reactions. Psychophysiology, 30(3), 261–273.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hollander, M., Wolfe, D. A., & Chicken, E. (2014). Nonparametric statistical methods. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Greco, A., Valenza, G., Scilingo, E.P. (2016). Evaluation of CDA and CvxEDA Models. In: Advances in Electrodermal Activity Processing with Applications for Mental Health. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-46705-4_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics