The effects of change in lead stimulus modality on the modulation of acoustic blink startle.

In two experiments we investigated the effect of generalized orienting induced by changing the modality of the lead stimulus on the modulation of blink reflexes elicited by acoustic stimuli. In Experiment 1 (n = 32), participants were presented with acoustic or visual change stimuli after habituation training with tactile lead stimuli. In Experiment 2 (n = 64), modality of the lead stimulus (acoustic vs. visual) was crossed with experimental condition (change vs. no change). Lead stimulus change resulted in increased electrodermal orienting in both experiments. Blink latency shortening and blink magnitude facilitation increased from habituation to change trials regardless of whether the change stimulus was presented in the same or in a different modality as the reflex-eliciting stimulus. These results are not consistent with modality-specific accounts of attentional startle modulation.

The effect of warning stimulus modality on blink startle modification in reaction time tasks.

The present study investigated the effects of lead stimulus modality on modification of the acoustic startle reflex during three reaction time tasks. In Experiment 1, participants (N = 48) were required to press a button at the offset of one stimulus (task relevant) and to ignore presentations of a second (task irrelevant). Two tones that differed in pitch or two lights served as signal stimuli. Blink startle was elicited during some of the stimuli and during interstimulus intervals. Skin conductance responses were larger during task-relevant stimuli in both groups. Larger blink facilitation during task-relevant stimuli was found only in the group presented with auditory stimuli, whereas larger blink latency shortening during task-relevant stimuli was found in both groups. Experiment 2 (N = 32) used only a task-relevant stimulus. Blink magnitude facilitation was significant only in the group presented with tones, whereas blink latency shortening was significant in both groups. Experiment 3 (N = 80) used a go/nogo task that required participants to press a button if one element of a compound stimulus ended before the second, but not if the asynchrony was reversed. The offset asynchrony was varied between groups as a manipulation of task difficulty. Startle magnitude facilitation was larger during acoustic than during visual stimuli and larger in the easy condition. The present data indicate that startle facilitation in a reaction time task is affected by stimulus modality and by task demands. The effects of the task demands seem to be independent of lead stimulus modality.

The effect of unconditional stimulus modality and intensity on blink startle and electrodermal responses.

Attentional accounts of blink facilitation during Pavlovian conditioning predict enhanced reflexes if reflex and unconditional stimuli (US) are from the same modality. Emotional accounts emphasize the importance of US intensity. In Experiment 1, we crossed US modality (tone vs. shock) and intensity in a 2 x 2 between-subjects design. US intensity but not US modality affected blink facilitation. In Experiment 2, we demonstrated that the results from Experiment 1 were not due to the motor task requirements employed. In Experiment 3, we used a within-subjects design to investigate the effects of US modality and intensity. Contrary to predictions derived from an attentional account, blink facilitation was larger during conditional stimuli that preceded shock than during those that preceded tones. The present results are not consistent with an attentional account of blink facilitation during Pavlovian conditioning in humans.