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

Numerous methods exist for the pre-processing and analysis of skin-conductance response (SCR) data, but there is incomplete consensus on suitability and implementation, particularly with regard to signal filtering in conventional peak score (PS) analysis. This is particularly relevant when SCRs are measured during fMRI, which introduces additional noise and signal variability. Using SCR-fMRI data (n = 65 women) from a fear conditioning experiment, we compare the impact of three nested data processing methods on analysis using conventional PS as well as psychophysiological modeling. To evaluate the different methods, we quantify effect size to recover a benchmark contrast of interest, namely, discriminating SCR magnitude to a conditioned stimulus (CS+) relative to a CS not followed by reinforcement (CS-). Findings suggest that low-pass filtering reduces PS sensitivity (Δd = -20%), while band-pass filtering improves PS sensitivity (Δd = +27%). We also replicate previous findings that a psychophysiological modeling approach yields superior sensitivity to detect contrasts of interest than even the most sensitive PS method (Δd = +110%). Furthermore, we present preliminary evidence that filtering differences may account for a portion of exclusions made on commonly applied metrics, such as below zero discrimination. Despite some limitations of our sample and experimental design, it appears that SCR processing pipelines that include band-pass filtering, ideally with model-based SCR quantification, may increase the validity of SCR response measures, maximize research productivity, and decrease sampling bias by reducing data exclusion.

[1]  C. Rennie,et al.  Decomposing skin conductance into tonic and phasic components. , 1997, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[2]  D. Bach,et al.  Testing a linear time invariant model for skin conductance responses by intraneural recording and stimulation , 2017, Psychophysiology.

[3]  A. Hamm,et al.  UPDATED META‐ANALYSIS OF CLASSICAL FEAR CONDITIONING IN THE ANXIETY DISORDERS , 2015, Depression and anxiety.

[4]  Jacob Cohen A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales , 1960 .

[5]  Tobias Sommer,et al.  Sex differences in conditioned stimulus discrimination during context-dependent fear learning and its retrieval in humans: the role of biological sex, contraceptives and menstrual cycle phases. , 2015, Journal of psychiatry & neuroscience : JPN.

[6]  P. Shekelle,et al.  Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement , 2015, Systematic Reviews.

[7]  Jenifer Juranek,et al.  Children’s head motion during fMRI tasks is heritable and stable over time , 2017, Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience.

[8]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Dynamic causal modelling of anticipatory skin conductance responses , 2010, Biological Psychology.

[9]  H. Akaike,et al.  Information Theory and an Extension of the Maximum Likelihood Principle , 1973 .

[10]  M. A. Rowe,et al.  Guide for Analysing Electrodermal Activity & Skin Conductance Responses for Psychological Experiments , 2013 .

[11]  D. Charney,et al.  The development of a Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale , 1995, Journal of traumatic stress.

[12]  Jan Richter,et al.  Navigating the garden of forking paths for data exclusions in fear conditioning research , 2019, eLife.

[13]  P. Venables,et al.  Publication recommendations for electrodermal measurements. , 1981 .

[14]  Russell A. Poldrack,et al.  Deconvolving BOLD activation in event-related designs for multivoxel pattern classification analyses , 2012, NeuroImage.

[15]  G. Ben-Shakhar,et al.  Standardization within individuals: a simple method to neutralize individual differences in skin conductance. , 1985, Psychophysiology.

[16]  M. Benedek,et al.  Decomposition of skin conductance data by means of nonnegative deconvolution , 2010, Psychophysiology.

[17]  Ryan O. Murphy,et al.  Using Skin Conductance in Judgment and Decision Making Research , 2011 .

[18]  Paul M. Thompson,et al.  Head Motion and Inattention/Hyperactivity Share Common Genetic Influences: Implications for fMRI Studies of ADHD , 2016, PloS one.

[19]  M. Otto,et al.  Assessment of skin conductance in African American and Non-African American participants in studies of conditioned fear. , 2017, Psychophysiology.

[20]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  An improved algorithm for model-based analysis of evoked skin conductance responses☆ , 2013, Biological Psychology.

[21]  C. Korn,et al.  Psychophysiological modeling: Current state and future directions. , 2018, Psychophysiology.

[22]  J. Lagopoulos,et al.  A fiber-optic system for recording skin conductance in the MRI scanner , 2005, Behavior research methods.

[23]  Ludovico Minati,et al.  Physiological recordings: Basic concepts and implementation during functional magnetic resonance imaging , 2009, NeuroImage.

[24]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Time-series analysis for rapid event-related skin conductance responses , 2009, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[25]  P. Venables,et al.  Direct measurement of skin conductance: a proposal for standardization. , 1971, Psychophysiology.

[26]  D. Bach A head-to-head comparison of SCRalyze and Ledalab, two model-based methods for skin conductance analysis , 2014, Biological Psychology.

[27]  O. Franco,et al.  Optimal database combinations for literature searches in systematic reviews: a prospective exploratory study , 2017, Systematic Reviews.

[28]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Modelling event-related skin conductance responses , 2010, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[29]  J. Fahrenberg,et al.  An evaluation of trait, state, and reaction aspects of activation processes. , 1983, Psychophysiology.

[30]  T. Lonsdorf,et al.  More than just noise: Inter-individual differences in fear acquisition, extinction and return of fear in humans - Biological, experiential, temperamental factors, and methodological pitfalls , 2017, Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews.

[31]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Model-based analysis of skin conductance responses: Towards causal models in psychophysiology. , 2013, Psychophysiology.

[32]  D. Bach,et al.  Optimising a model-based approach to inferring fear learning from skin conductance responses , 2015, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.