Literature DB >> 30175471

Psychophysiological modeling: Current state and future directions.

Dominik R Bach1,2,3, Giuseppe Castegnetti1,2, Christoph W Korn1,2,4, Samuel Gerster1,2, Filip Melinscak1,2, Tobias Moser1,2.   

Abstract

Psychologists often use peripheral physiological measures to infer a psychological variable. It is desirable to make this inverse inference in the most precise way, ideally standardized across research laboratories. In recent years, psychophysiological modeling has emerged as a method that rests on statistical techniques to invert mathematically formulated forward models (psychophysiological models, PsPMs). These PsPMs are based on psychophysiological knowledge and optimized with respect to the precision of the inference. Building on established experimental manipulations, known to create different values of a psychological variable, they can be benchmarked in terms of their sensitivity (e.g., effect size) to recover these values-we have termed this predictive validity. In this review, we introduce the problem of inverse inference and psychophysiological modeling as a solution. We present background and application for all peripheral measures for which PsPMs have been developed: skin conductance, heart period, respiratory measures, pupil size, and startle eyeblink. Many of these PsPMs are task invariant, implemented in open-source software, and can be used off the shelf for a wide range of experiments. Psychophysiological modeling thus appears as a potentially powerful method to infer psychological variables.
© 2018 Society for Psychophysiological Research.

Entities:  

Keywords:  analysis/statistical methods; autonomic nervous system; computational modeling; electrodermal activity; heart rate; pupillometry

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30175471     DOI: 10.1111/psyp.13209

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychophysiology        ISSN: 0048-5772            Impact factor:   4.016


  15 in total

1.  Race and ethnic variation in college students' allostatic regulation of racism-related stress.

Authors:  Jacob E Cheadle; Bridget J Goosby; Joseph C Jochman; Cara C Tomaso; Chelsea B Kozikowski Yancey; Timothy D Nelson
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2020-11-23       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Filtering and model-based analysis independently improve skin-conductance response measures in the fMRI environment: Validation in a sample of women with PTSD.

Authors:  Anthony A Privratsky; Keith A Bush; Dominik R Bach; Emily M Hahn; Josh M Cisler
Journal:  Int J Psychophysiol       Date:  2020-10-16       Impact factor: 2.997

3.  Computational modeling of threat learning reveals links with anxiety and neuroanatomy in humans.

Authors:  Rany Abend; Diana Burk; Sonia G Ruiz; Andrea L Gold; Julia L Napoli; Jennifer C Britton; Kalina J Michalska; Tomer Shechner; Anderson M Winkler; Ellen Leibenluft; Daniel S Pine; Bruno B Averbeck
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2022-04-27       Impact factor: 8.713

4.  Cortico-Striatal Activity Characterizes Human Safety Learning via Pavlovian Conditioned Inhibition.

Authors:  Patrick A F Laing; Trevor Steward; Christopher G Davey; Kim L Felmingham; Miguel Angel Fullana; Bram Vervliet; Matthew D Greaves; Bradford Moffat; Rebecca K Glarin; Ben J Harrison
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2022-05-16       Impact factor: 6.709

5.  Modeling pupil responses to rapid sequential events.

Authors:  Rachel N Denison; Jacob A Parker; Marisa Carrasco
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2020-10

6.  Anxiety and the Neurobiology of Temporally Uncertain Threat Anticipation.

Authors:  Juyoen Hur; Jason F Smith; Kathryn A DeYoung; Allegra S Anderson; Jinyi Kuang; Hyung Cho Kim; Rachael M Tillman; Manuel Kuhn; Andrew S Fox; Alexander J Shackman
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2020-09-21       Impact factor: 6.167

7.  Saccadic scanpath length: an index for human threat conditioning.

Authors:  Yanfang Xia; Filip Melinscak; Dominik R Bach
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2020-11-09

8.  Primary auditory cortex representation of fear-conditioned musical sounds.

Authors:  Matthias Staib; Aslan Abivardi; Dominik R Bach
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2019-10-30       Impact factor: 5.399

9.  Impact of a reminder/extinction procedure on threat-conditioned pupil size and skin conductance responses.

Authors:  Josua Zimmermann; Dominik R Bach
Journal:  Learn Mem       Date:  2020-03-16       Impact factor: 2.460

10.  Psychophysiological modelling and the measurement of fear conditioning.

Authors:  Dominik R Bach; Filip Melinscak
Journal:  Behav Res Ther       Date:  2020-02-10
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.