Skip to main content
Journal of Undergraduate Neuroscience Education logoLink to Journal of Undergraduate Neuroscience Education
. 2025 Dec 30;24(1):47–55. doi: 10.59390/001c.154524

Effect of Neutral and Negative Images on Galvanic Skin Response: An Activity for Courses in Forensic, Affective, and Behavioral Neuroscience

Robert W Flint Jr 1, Shania Jagda 2
PMCID: PMC13127673  PMID: 42065105

Abstract

The galvanic skin response (GSR) has provided important scientific insight in a wide range of contexts and has been used in neuroscience research for many decades. It is important for undergraduate students to understand this versatile technique and its application in areas such as Affective, Behavioral, and Forensic Neuroscience. Participants in this study viewed a slideshow containing negative and neutral images selected from the RADIATE and IAPS databases after being connected to a small portable GSR biofeedback monitor. Images were presented for 7-sec on a computer screen followed by a 20-sec blank screen. Each participant’s highest GSR response during the 7-sec image presentation was recorded. Participants provided a valence rating, using a 5-point Likert scale, immediately after each image was presented. The mean GSR for images rated as negative was significantly higher than the mean GSR for images rated as neutral. Results were discussed with the class prior to the completion of demographic and activity effectiveness questionnaires. All responses were significant on the activity effectiveness questionnaire. Participants reported a better understanding of the use of GSR in neuroscience, considered this activity a valuable experience, and recommended its use in future classes.

Keywords: galvanic skin response (GSR), stress, arousal, forensic neuroscience, affective neuroscience, behavioral neuroscience, classroom activity


The electrodermal response, or galvanic skin response (GSR), has a long history (Widacki, 2015) and is often initially thought of in association with studies on emotion (Horvers et al., 2021; Kreibig et al., 2007), stress (Joshi et al., 2017; Yang et al., 2021), and lying/deception (Lykken, 1959; Orne & Thackray, 1967; Thackray & Orne, 1968). However, its use is far more extensive, and it has become an important variable of study in neuroscience research with both human and non-human primates (see Table 1; Laine et al., 2009). GSR has been used to assess activation of the sympathetic division of the autonomic nervous system in studies on a wide variety of topics ranging from academic performance (Villanueva et al., 2016) to the effects of TV commercials (Vecchiato et al., 2010), and has implicated a role for many different neural structures in primates including the amygdala and sensorimotor, parietal, and cingulate cortex (Gertler et al., 2020; Wood et al., 2014; Zhang et al., 2013)

Table 1. Representative Studies Using Galvanic Skin Response.

Topic Reference(s)
Aggression de Looff et al. (2019)
Auditory Threshold Neri et al. (2022)
Biofeedback Training Castelletti et al. (2024); Markiewicz & Dobrowolska (2021)
Cognitive Load Shi et al. (2007)
Drug Use Ding et al. (2020)
Education Dong et al. (2025); Villanueva et al. (2016)
Experiencing Keelin (1973)
Emotion Chung et al. (2007); Korpal & Jankowiak (2018); Prasolenko et al. (2017)
Epilepsy Nagai (2011, p. 2019); Sandor et al. (2025)
Guilt Yu et al. (2017)
Kleptomania Olbrich et al. (2019)
Hypoglycemic Stress Patel et al. (2014)
Language Parker (2007); Pishghadam et al. (2024)
Lying KreyBig & Krautz (2019)
Maternal Depression Mareckova et al. (2025)
Meditation Anand (2014)
Mental Health Demedts et al. (2023); Gordon et al. (2025); Markiewicz et al. (2022); Radu et al. (2003); Vahey & Becerra (2015)
Movement Toward Reward Amiez et al. (2003)
Music Stephenson et al. (2016)
Pain Painter et al. (1965)
Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Cox et al. (2023)
Trauma/PTSD Machlin et al. (2024); Putica et al. (2023)
TV Commercials Vecchiato et al. (2010)

Many different types of stimuli may produce stress- and/or emotion-induced sympathetic nervous system changes. Human faces have been frequently used to elicit a GSR and faces are particularly relevant stimuli in the fields of Affective and Forensic Neuroscience (Avram et al., 2010; Banks et al., 2012, 2014; Juuse et al., 2024; Stagg et al., 2013). Several databases have been developed to study emotional facial expressions including the Racially Diverse Affective Expression face set (RADIATE, Conley et al., 2018; Tottenham et al., 2009), The City Infant Faces Database (Webb et al., 2018), and the Pictures of Facial Affect database (POFA; Ekman & Friesen, 1976). Similarly, the study of human emotion has resulted in the development of several sets of stimuli for validated assessment. Databases such as the International Affective Picture System (IAPS; Lang et al., 1999), the Nencki Affective Picture System (NAPS; Marchewka et al., 2014), the Geneva Affective Picture Database (GAPED; Dan-Glauser & Scherer, 2011), and the Open Affective Standardized Image Set (OASIS, Kurdi et al., 2017) have been used extensively to study emotion. The development and availability of databases such as these to study facial expressions and emotions also provides an opportunity to develop classroom activities that afford students opportunities to use and experience some of the same stimuli and research protocols that scientists are using to explore these phenomena.

Despite the importance of GSR in neuroscience research, there are relatively few published studies addressing its pedagogical use in higher education. Nepal et al. (2018) used GSR as a teaching tool in a physiology lab as an indicator of sympathetic nervous system arousal. In their study they used a subtraction task to manipulate cognitive load, a concept relevant to cognitive neuroscience but of less interest to students in Forensic and/or Affective neuroscience. It is not clear what equipment was used to examine GSR, so the feasibility of adopting the activity for use in undergraduate neuroscience courses is not clear. In a study examining student engagement, McNeal et al. (2020) used Empatica E4 wrist biosensors in a large introductory biology course. They found that the use of biosensors has promising potential as an indicator of student engagement in the classroom, but the activity was not utilized as a means of educating students on the GSR technique.

As interest in neuroscience and its subdisciplines continues to grow, so does the need for classroom activities that help students understand how equipment and techniques are applied in neuroscientific research and applied settings. Utilizing classroom activities may also help students connect with the course material (Flint et al., 2025). GSR is often used as a measurement tool in forensic-related disciplines. For example, Kumar (2012) explored connections between GSR and psychological well-being in criminals convicted of crimes such as murder, rape, and robbery, Loeber et al. (2007) examined skin conductance as a possible predictor of desistance from delinquency, Gatzke-Kopp et al. (2002) examined electrodermal responses in connection with sensation seeking and delinquent behavior, and Brennan et al. (1997) studied skin conductance in males at high risk for criminal behavior.

The objective was to develop an activity that would allow students to better understand the connection between emotional arousal and galvanic skin response. We used stimuli with a negative emotional valence to maximize the likelihood of eliciting a GSR, and because of the high relevance of such stimuli to Affective Neuroscience and the evolving field of Forensic Neuroscience. Relatively inexpensive GSR monitors were used as a means of establishing a reliable activity that would be affordable for most faculty.

Materials and Methods

Participants

A total of twenty-one students from one section of Forensic Psychology and one section of Neuropsychology at Albany College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences participated in the GSR activity in the spring of 2025. Of those, 19 were present the day the demographic and activity experience questionnaires were completed. Participant age ranged from 19 to 33 with a mean of 21.3 years. Two participants were in their first year and there were 4 sophomores, 9 juniors, and 4 seniors. Fourteen of the participants indicated their sex/gender status as woman while 4 indicated man, and 1 indicated non-binary. Race and ethnicity revealed that most of the participants (11) were white, 1 indicated Hispanic or Latino, 1 Black or African American, 4 Asian, and 2 indicated two or more races. Participants were offered 10 points of extra credit for participating in the activity. An alternative article critique assignment was made available to any student who did not wish to participate in the GSR activity. Approval of all procedures was obtained from the Institutional Review Board for research with human participants prior to any data collection.

Apparatus and Materials

A portable Bio-Feedback Monitor-GSR2-Expert from Hypno-Quip Hypnotherapy Equipment UK Ltd. was used to obtain galvanic skin responses (https://www.hypno-quip.co.uk/). This easy-to-use and relatively inexpensive device was equipped with a bio-sensor lead with two terminals. Continuous GSR readings were recorded to the tenth of an ohm.

Research has shown that negative images may produce significant changes in GSR, and the amplitude of the change is reportedly related to the level of arousal induced by the images (Bradley et al., 2001). A total of 16 images were selected (see Table 2 for brief description and stimulus set numbers). Eight images, 4 neutral and 4 negative, were selected from the International Affective Picture System (IAPS; Lang et al., 1999). Eight male face images were also selected from the Racially Diverse Affective Expression (RADIATE) face stimulus set, 4 neutral and 4 negative (Conley et al., 2018; Tottenham et al., 2009). Negative images were selected to elicit stronger GSRs in accordance with the literature. Images were arranged into a PowerPoint slideshow with 1 image per slide and presented using a Dell Latitude 5400 laptop computer connected to an external 24-inch Dell color monitor.

Table 2. Arousing and Neutral Stimuli from the RADIATE and IAPS Databases.

RADIATE
Neutral Stimulus # Arousing Stimulus #
Male, Neutral AM01_NC Male, Angry BM03_AO
Male, Neutral AM07_NC Male, Angry AM02_AO
Male, Neutral BM11_NC Male, Angry AM11_AO
Male, Neutral BM16_NC Male, Angry BM02_AO
IAPS
Neutral Stimulus # Arousing Stimulus #
Electrical Outlet 6150 Dental Surgery 9584
Spoon 7004 Attacking Snake 1052
Book 7090 Bloodied Boxer 8230
Towel 7002 Tarantula on Shoulder 1201

A demographic questionnaire was used to collect descriptive information from the participants, and a short activity questionnaire was created to assess each participant’s perspective regarding the educational value of the GSR activity.

Procedure

Students from the PI’s Forensic Neuroscience and Neuropsychology classes received a lecture on GSR in relation to the course content, after which they were provided with a brief overview of the research participation opportunity. It was explained that the PI and a research assistant would collect data from individual students, but the hope was to develop an activity in the future where students would have the opportunity to use GSR monitors themselves in class to collect data with their classmates. Students interested in volunteering for the research signed up for a time to come to the PI’s lab to participate. After signing an informed consent form, bio-sensor terminals were connected to the middle phalanges of each participants’ index and middle fingers. Participants were asked to find a comfortable and relaxing position while the procedure was explained. Participants were told that they would watch a PowerPoint slideshow consisting of 16 images, presented full-screen for 7-sec, each followed by a 20-sec white screen with a large black ‘+’ centered on it. Participants were told to focus on the image on the screen of the 24-inch Dell color monitor. The researchers simultaneously watched the slideshow presentation on the laptop and the GSR monitor and recorded the highest GSR value from the monitor during each stimulus presentation. Immediately following each image presentation, after the blank screen appeared, participants were asked to provide a rating of the previous image using a 5-pt Likert scale (1=very negative, 2=negative, 3=neutral, 4=positive, 5=very positive) which the researchers noted on the datasheet. Once the PowerPoint slideshow was completed the bio-sensor terminals were removed from the participant’s fingers and a short debriefing statement was read.

Following GSR data collection, the results were analyzed by the PI and a short PowerPoint presentation was developed. The data analysis procedure and results were then presented to the classes. The general procedure and purpose of the activity was discussed along with the statistical analysis and interpretation of the results. Immediately following the classroom presentation and discussion of the results, participants were asked to complete the demographic and activity effectiveness questionnaires.

Results

Individual participants’ baseline GSR values at the start of the study were highly variable as were the valence ratings participants provided for each image. To determine whether images with different emotional valences elicited different GSR responses, two mean GSR values were calculated for analysis. The first mean was determined using only the GSR for images each individual participant rated as ‘neutral’ (3 on the Likert scale), thus providing a mean ‘neutral’ GSR. The second mean was calculated using only images each individual participant rated as ‘very negative’ or ‘negative’ (1 or 2 on the Likert scale), providing a ‘negative’ GSR value.

Seventeen of the twenty-one participants had a higher mean GSR for images they had rated as negative in comparison to those they rated as neutral. A paired samples t-test for the mean neutral (M = 57.017, SD = 14.191) and mean negative (M = 57.891, SD = 13.154) GSR values revealed a significantly higher GSR value for negative images [t(20) = 2.34, p = .015].

Results from the activity questionnaire were analyzed using non-parametric Wilcoxon Signed Rank tests for each of the questions (see Figure 1). The comparison value for these analyses was 3 (neither agree nor disagree). Z-scores for these questions ranged from 3.61 to 3.91 and all p values were < .001.

Figure 1. Activity Effectiveness Questionnaire. Mean responses and standard deviations on the 5-point Likert scale for each of the questions on the activity effectiveness questionnaire.

Figure 1.

Note: Mean responses and standard deviation on the 5-point Likert scale for each of the questions on the activity effectiveness questionnaire.

Discussion

GSR is a widely used technique for assessing sympathetic autonomic nervous system activity. Here we report the results of an easy and inexpensive lab activity for assessing responses to negative emotionally arousing stimuli. This simple activity requires relatively little time to complete and is relevant to many neuroscientific subdisciplines, including Affective, Behavioral, and Forensic Neuroscience.

Results of the activity effectiveness questionnaire indicated that the activity was very well received. Students felt that participating was a valuable experience that should be used in future classes. They reported that it was beneficial to discuss the activity and how the data were analyzed and that they gained a better understanding of how GSR reflects sympathetic nervous system arousal and how this technique is used.

The data reported here were obtained by testing one participant at a time using negative emotionally arousing stimuli. However, this activity could easily be modified in several ways. For example, with the acquisition of multiple GSR units, students could be divided into small groups, provided with sets of stimuli, and allowed to collect data from each other to provide a more direct and hands-on approach to the activity. While the activity reported here used only negative images, and did not differentiate between negative faces and other negative pictures, activities could be developed that would allow students to examine only one type of stimulus (e.g., threatening animals), to compare different types of stimuli (e.g., emotional faces of different racial/ethnic groups), to examine GSR for stimuli with a positive valence, to assess GSR over longer periods of stimulus exposure, etc. Faculty interested in developing a series of labs related to stress and emotional arousal might consider the addition of activities involving hypermnesia and reminiscence for emotionally arousing words or spatial memory for emotionally arousing pictures (Flint, 2004). Examination of blood glucose or cortisol levels, as indicators of stress, emotional arousal, or other variables related to classroom performance, might also be incorporated to expand relevant hands-on experiences for students (Dimolareva et al., 2018; Flint, 2004; Kalman & Grahn, 2004; Park et al., 2023; Preuβ et al., 2010; Silva et al., 2020; Snopkowski et al., 2019). The flexibility of this activity is a particular strength, as it allows interested faculty to modify the stimuli and/or procedures to meet the needs of their course and to connect the activity with their course material in a meaningful way.

References

  1. Reward anticipation, cognition, and electrodermal activity in the conditioned monkey. Amiez C., Procyk E., Honore J., Sequeira H., Joseph J. P. 2003Experimental Brain Research. 149:267–275. doi: 10.1007/s00221-002-1353-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Effect of meditation ("OM" chanting) on alpha EEG and galvanic skin response: Measurement of an altered state of consciousness. Anand H. 2014Indian Journal of Positive Psychology. 5(3):255–259. [Google Scholar]
  3. Frontal EEG activation asymmetry reflects cognitive biases in anxiety: Evidence from an emotional face Stroop task. Avram J., Baltes F. R., Miclea M., Miu A. C. 2010Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback. 35(4):285–292. doi: 10.1007/s10484-010-9138-6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10484-010-9138-6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Bilateral skin conductance responses to emotional faces. Banks S. J., Bellerose J., Douglas D., Jones-Gotman M. 2012Applied Psychophysiology Biofeedback. 37(3):145–152. doi: 10.1007/s10484-011-9177-7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10484-011-9177-7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. The insular cortex: Relationship to skin conductance responses to facial expression of emotion in temporal lobe epilepsy. Banks S. J., Bellerose J., Douglas D., Jones-Gotman M. 2014Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback. 39(1):1–8. doi: 10.1007/s10484-013-9236-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Emotion and motivation. I. Defensive and appetitive reactions in picture processing. Bradley M. M., Codispoti M., Cuthbert B. N., Lang P. J. 2001Emotion. 1:276–298. doi: 10.1037/1528-3542.1.3.276. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Psychophysiological protective factors for male subjects at high risk for criminal behavior. Brennan P. A., Raine A., Schulsinger F., Kirkegaard-Sorensen L., Knop J., Hutchings B., Rosenberg R., Mednick S. A. 1997American Journal of Psychiatry. 154:853–855. doi: 10.1176/ajp.154.6.853. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Galvanic skin response – Extinction biofeedback training for psychogenic abdominal pain: A validation protocol. Castelletti M., Berne E., Castagnoli E. D. C., Montagna A., Tonon G. 2024Journal of Biosciences and Medicines. 12(5):190–201. doi: 10.4236/jbm.2024.125015. https://doi.org/10.4236/jbm.2024.125015 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  9. Development of the Real-Time Subjective Emotionality Assessment (RTSEA) system. Chung S.-C., Yoon-Ki M., Lee B., Gye-Rae T., Yi J.-H., You J.-H., Jun J.-H. 2007Behavioral Research Methods. 39(1):144–150. doi: 10.3758/BF03192853. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. The racially diverse affective expression (RADIATE) face stimulus set. Conley M. I., Dellarco D. V., Rubien-Thomas E., Cohen A. O., Cervera A., Tottenham N., Casey B. J. 2018Psychiatry Research. 270:1059–1067. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2018.04.066. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. A review of clinical studies of electrodermal activity and transcranial magnetic stimulation. Cox O. D., Munjal A., McCall W. V., Miller B. J., Baeken C., Rosenquist P. B. 2023Psychiatry Research. 329:115535. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2023.115535. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2023.115535 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. The Geneva affective picture database (GAPED): a new 730-picture database focusing on valence and normative significance. Dan-Glauser E. S., Scherer K. R. 2011Behavioral Research Methods. 43(2):468–477. doi: 10.3758/s13428-011-0064-1. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-011-0064-1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Changes in heart rate and skin conductance in the 30 min preceding aggressive behavior. de Looff P., Noordzij M. L., Moerbeek M., Nijman H., Didden R., Embregts P. 2019Psychophysiology. 10:e13420. doi: 10.1111/psyp.13420. https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.13420 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Measuring math anxiety through self-reports and physiological data. Demedts F., Cornelis J., Reynvoet B., Sasanguie D., Depaepe F. 2023Journal of Numerical Cognition. 9(3):380–397. doi: 10.5964/jnc.9735. https://doi.org/10.5964/jnc.9735 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  15. Measuring cortisol in the classroom with school-aged children – A systematic review and recommendations. Dimolareva M., Gee N. R., Pfeffer K., Marechal L., Pennington K., Meints K. 2018International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 15(5):1025. doi: 10.3390/ijerph15051025. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15051025 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Using machine-learning approach to distinguish patients with methamphetamine dependence from healthy subjects in a virtual reality environment. Ding X., Li Y., Li D., Li L., Liu X. 2020Brain and Behavior. 10(11):e01814. doi: 10.1002/brb3.1814. https://doi.org/10.1002/brb3.1814 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Measuring emotion in education using GSR and HR data from wearable devices. Dong Q., Wang Q., Miao R. 2025Journal of Educational Technology Development and Exchange. 18(1):10–29. [Google Scholar]
  18. Ekman P., Friesen W. V. Pictures of facial affect. Consulting Psychologists Press; Palo Alto, CA: [Google Scholar]
  19. Emotional arousal, blood glucose levels, and memory modulation: Three laboratory exercises in cognitive neuroscience. Flint R. W., Jr. 2004Journal of Undergraduate Neuroscience Education. 3(1):A16–A23. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Using case studies from Neurocase to promote an understanding of and appreciation for Behavioral and Forensic Neuroscience. Flint R. W., Jr., Farnum K., Rodriguez Steen L. A. 2025Journal of Undergraduate Neuroscience Education. 23(2):A56–A65. doi: 10.59390/GZAT7086. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Serious delinquent behavior, sensation seeking, and electrodermal arousal. Gatzke-Kopp L. M., Raine A., Rolf L., Stouthamer-Loeber M., Steinhauer S. R. 2002Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology. 30(5):477–486. doi: 10.1023/A:1019816930615. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1019816930615 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Neural correlates of non-specific skin conductance responses during resting state fMRI. Gertler J., Novotny S., Poppe A., Chung Y. S., Gross J. J., Pearlson G., Stevens M. C. 2020NeuroImage. 214:116721. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.116721. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.116721 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Effects of manual osteopathic interventions on psychometric and psychophysiological indicators of anxiety, depression and stress in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized control trials. Gordon T. C., Hope-Bell J., Draper-Rodi J., MacMillan A., Miller D., Edwards D. J. 2025BMJ Open. 15(2):e095933. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-095933. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2024-095933 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Detecting emotions through electrodermal activity in learning contexts: A systematic review. Horvers A., Tombeng N., Bosse T., Lazonder A. W., Molenaar I. 2021Sensors (Basel) 21(23):7869. doi: 10.3390/s21237869. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21237869 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Stress monitoring through non-invasive instrumental analysis of skin conductivity. Joshi A., Kiran R., Sah A. N. 2017Work. 57(2):233–243. doi: 10.3233/WOR-172553. https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-172553 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Skin conductance response and habituation to emotional facial expressions and words. Juuse L., Tamm D., Loo K., Allik J., Kreegipuu K. 2024Acta Psychologia. 251:104573. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2024.104573. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2024.104573 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Measuring salivary cortisol in the behavioral neuroscience laboratory. Kalman B. A., Grahn R. E. 2004The Journal of Undergraduate Neuroscience Education. 2(2):A41–A49. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Galvanic skin response correlates of different modes of experiencing: A study with children. Keelin P. W. 1973Psychotherapy: Theory, Research & Practice. 10(3):231–233. doi: 10.1037/h0087582. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0087582 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  29. Physiological and self-report measures in emotion studies: Methodological considerations. Korpal P., Jankowiak K. 2018Polish Psychological Bulletin. 49(4):475–481. doi: 10.24425/124345. https://doi.org/10.24425/124345 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  30. Cardiovascular, electrodermal, and respiratory response patterns to fear- and sadness-inducing films. Kreibig S. D., Wilhelm F. H., Roth W. T., Gross J. J. 2007Psychophysiology. 44(5):787–806. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2007.00550.x. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.2007.00550.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Lying and perception of lies by bilingual speakers. KreyBig N., Krautz A. E. 2019Applied Psycholinguists. 40(5):1–17. doi: 10.1017/S0142716419000286. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716419000286 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  32. Impact of galvanic skin response on emotional intelligence and psychological well-being of criminals. Kumar S. 2012Indian Journal of Positive Psychology. 3(4):463–466. [Google Scholar]
  33. Introducing the Open Affective Standardized Image Set (OASIS) Kurdi B., Lozano S., Banaji M. R. 2017Behavior Research Methods. 49(2):457–470. doi: 10.3758/s13428-016-0715-3. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-016-0715-3 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Behavioral triggers of skin conductance responses and their neural correlates in the primate amygdala. Laine C. M., Spitler K. M., Mosher C. P., Gothard K. M. 2009Journal of Neurophysiology. 101(4):1749–1754. doi: 10.1152/jn.91110.2008. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.91110.2008 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Lang P. J., Bradley M. M., Cuthbert B. N. The International Affective Picture System (IAPS) University of Florida Center for Research in Psychophysiology; Gainesville: [Google Scholar]
  36. Do cognitive, physiological, and psychosocial risk and promotive factors predict desistance from delinquency in males? Loeber R., Pardini D. A., Stouthamer-Loeber M., Raine A. 2007Development and Psychopathology. 19:867–887. doi: 10.1017/S0954579407000429. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579407000429 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. The GSR in the detection of guilt. Lykken D. T. 1959Journal of Applied Psychology. 43(6):385–388. doi: 10.1037/h0046060. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046060 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  38. Alterations in fear learning as a mechanism linking childhood exposure to violence with PTSD symptoms: a longitudinal study. Machlin L., Sheridan M. A., Lurie L. A., Kasparek S. W., Kim S. G., Peverill M., France J. M., Robertson M. M., Jovanovic T., Lengua L. J., McLaughlin K. A. 2024Psychological Medicine. 54(12):3389–3397. doi: 10.1017/S0033291724001569. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291724001569 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. The Nencki affective picture system (NAPS): Introduction to a novel standardized, wide-range, high-quality, realistic picture database. Marchewka A., Zurawski L., Jednorog K., Grabowska A. 2014Behavioral Research Methods. 46(2):596–610. doi: 10.3758/s13428-013-0379-1. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-013-0379-1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Maternal depression during the perinatal period and its relationship with emotion regulation in young adulthood: An fMRI study in a prenatal birth cohort. Mareckova K., Trbusek F., Marecek R., Chladek J., Koscova Z., Plesinger F., Andryskova L., Brazdil M., Nikolova Y. S. 2025Psychological Medicine. 55(e39):1–10. doi: 10.1017/S0033291725000042. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291725000042 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Initial results of tests using GSR biofeedback as a new neurorehabilitation technology complementing pharmacological treatment of patients with schizophrenia. Markiewicz R., Dobrowolska B. 2021BioMed Research International. 2021(5552937):1–12. doi: 10.1155/2021/5552937. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/5552937 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Galvanic skin response features in psychiatry and mental disorders: A narrative review. Markiewicz R., Markiewicz-Gospodarek A., Dobrowolska B. 2022International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 19(20):13428. doi: 10.3390/ijerph192013428. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192013428 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Biosensors show promise as a measure of student engagement in a large introductory biology course. McNeal K. S., Zhong M., Soltis N. A., Doukopoulos L., Johnson E. T., Courtney S., Alwan A., Porch M. 2020CBE Life Science Education. 19(4):ar50. doi: 10.1187/cbe.19-08-0158. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.19-08-0158 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Biofeedback and epilepsy. Nagai Y. 2011Current Neurology & Neuroscience Reports. 11(4):443–450. doi: 10.1007/s11910-011-0201-3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11910-011-0201-3 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Galvanic skin response as a simple physiology lab teaching tool – An alternative indicator of sympathetic arousal. Nepal O., Jha R. K., Bhattarai A., Khadka P., Kapoor B. K. 2018Kathmandu University Medical Journal (KUMJ) 16(62):156–60. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Galvanic skin response in auditory threshold evaluation, preliminary report. Neri G., Neri L., Marcucci M., Balzano R., Merla A. 2022Audiologia & Foniatria. 9(1):70–73. doi: 10.25430/pupj-IJAP-2024-1-7. https://doi.org/10.25430/pupj-IJAP-2024-1-7 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  47. Exposure and response prevention therapy augmented with naltrexone in kleptomania: a controlled case study using galvanic skin response for monitoring. Olbrich S., Jahn I., Stengler K. 2019Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy. 47(5):622–627. doi: 10.1017/S1352465819000213. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1352465819000213 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Group GSR technique in the detection of deception. Orne M. T., Thackray R. I. 1967Perceptual and Motor Skills. 25(3):809–16. doi: 10.2466/pms.1967.25.3.809. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.1967.25.3.809 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Galvanic skin response: Differences in organic and psychogenic pain of children. Painter P., Morrison J., Evens R. 1965American Journal of Diseases of Children. 110(3):265–69. doi: 10.1001/archpedi.1965.02090030279007. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpedi.1965.02090030279007 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Investigating cortisol in a STEM classroom: The association between cortisol and academic performance. Park H. J., Turetsky K. M., Dahl J. L., Pasek M. H., Germano A. L., Harper J. O., Purdie-Greenaway V., Cohen G. L., Cook J. E. 2023Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 51(3):357–373. doi: 10.1177/01461672231188277. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672231188277 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. The galvanic skin response (GSR) as a means of assessing and guiding instruction of receptive language in language-delayed non-verbal children. Parker J. L. 2007Australian Psychologist. 24(1):47–54. doi: 10.1080/00050068908259548. https://doi.org/10.1080/00050068908259548 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  52. Neuroendocrine and sympathetic responses to an orexin receptor antagonist, SB-649868, and Alprazolam following insulin-induced hypoglycemia in humans. Patel A. X., Miller S. R., Nathan P. J., Kanakaraj P., Napolitano A., Lawrence P., Koch A., Bullmore E. T. 2014Psychopharmacology. 231(19):3817–28. doi: 10.1007/s00213-014-3520-7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00213-014-3520-7 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Cognition-emotion interaction during L2 sentence comprehension: The correlation of ERP and GSR responses to sense combinations. Pishghadam R., Shayesteh S., Daneshvarfard F., Boustani N., Seyednozadi A., Zabetipour M., Pishghadam M. 2024Journal of Psycholinguist Research. 53(1):7. doi: 10.1007/s10936-024-10039-y. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-024-10039-y [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. Galvanic skin response as an estimation method of a driver's emotional state. Prasolenko O., Burko D., Halkin A. 2017American Journal of Science, Engineering and Technology. 2(1):50–66. doi: 10.11648/j.ajset.20170201.18. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajset.20170201.18 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  55. The stressed student: Influence of written examinations and oral presentations on salivary cortisol concentrations in university students. Preuβ D., Schoofs D., Schlotz W., Wolf O. T. 2010Stress. 13(3):221–229. doi: 10.3109/10253890903277579. https://doi.org/10.3109/10253890903277579 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  56. Emotion response disconcordance among trauma-exposed adults: the impact of alexithymia. Putica A., O'Donnell M. L., Felmingham K. L., Van Dam N. T. 2023Psychological Medicine. 53(12):5442–5448. doi: 10.1017/S0033291722002586. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291722002586 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  57. Pentagastrin test for anxiety – psychophysiology and personality. Radu D., Ahlin A., Svanborg P., Lindefors N. 2003Psychopharmacology. 166(2):139–145. doi: 10.1007/s00213-002-1316-7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00213-002-1316-7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  58. Comparison of decision-making behaviors and galvanic skin responses in patients with hippocampal sclerosis before and after epilepsy surgery: A case series. Sandor S., Delil S., Kurtish S. Y., Tanriverdi T., Yeni S. N., Dusunen A. 2025Journal of Psychiatry and Neurological Sciences. 38(1):33–35. doi: 10.14744/DAJPNS.2024.00270. https://doi.org/10.14744/DAJPNS.2024.00270 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  59. Galvanic skin response (GSR) as an index of cognitive load. Shi Y., Ruiz N., Taib R., Choi E., Chen F. 2007CHI '07 Extended Abstract on Human Factors in Computing Systems. doi: 10.1145/1240866.1241057. https://doi.org/10.1145/1240866.1241057 [DOI]
  60. Male high school students express higher blood cortisol levels during examination periods than female high school students. Silva M. X. R., Hernandez J. M., Mendez B. H., Martinez S. C., Cortes K. E. S., Gomez A. B. S. 2020Medical Research Archives. 8(9):1–8. doi: 10.18103/mra.v8i9.2242. https://doi.org/10.18103/mra.v8i9.2242 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  61. Small group learning is associated with reduced salivary cortisol and testosterone in undergraduate students. Snopkowski K., Demps K., Scaggs S., Griffiths R., Fulk K. S., May S., Neagle K., Downs K., Eugster M., Amend T. 2019Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. 19(5):36–52. doi: 10.14434/josotl.v19i5.24230. https://doi.org/10.14434/josotl.v19i5.24230 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  62. Associations between language development and skin conductance responses to faces and eye gaze in children with Autism Spectrum Disorder. Stagg S. D., Davis R., Heaton P. 2013Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders. 43(10):2303–2311. doi: 10.1007/s10803-013-1780-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  63. Age-related differences in response to music-evoked emotion among children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorders. Stephenson K. G., Quintin E. M., South M. 2016Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders. 46(4):1142–1151. doi: 10.1007/s10803-015-2624-1. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-015-2624-1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  64. A comparison of physiological indices in detection of deception. Thackray R. I., Orne M. T. 1968Psychophysiology. 4:219–339. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.1968.tb02775.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  65. The NimStim set of facial expressions: Judgements from untrained research participants. Tottenham N., Tanaka J. W., Leon A. C., McCarry T., Nurse M., Hare T. A., Marcus D. J., Westerlund A., Casey B. J., Nelson C. 2009Psychiatry Research. 168(3):242–49. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2008.05.006. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  66. Galvanic skin response in mood disorders: A critical review. Vahey R., Becerra R. 2015International Journal of Psychology and Psychological Therapy. 15(2):275–304. [Google Scholar]
  67. Changes in brain activity during the observation of TV commercials by using EEG, GSR, and HR measurements. Vecchiato G., Astolfi L., De Vico Fallani F., Cincotti F., Mattia D., Salinari S., Soranzo R., Babiloni F. 2010Brain Topography. 23(2):165–79. doi: 10.1007/s10548-009-0127-0. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10548-009-0127-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  68. Use of galvanic skin responses, salivary biomarkers, and self-reports to assess undergraduate student performance during a laboratory exam activity. Villanueva I., Valladares M., Goodridge W. 2016Journal of Visual Experiments. 108:53255. doi: 10.3791/53255. https://doi.org/10.3791/53255 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  69. The City Infant Faces Database: A validated set of infant facial expressions. Webb R., Ayers S., Endress A. 2018Behavior Research Methods. 50:151–159. doi: 10.3758/s13428-017-0859-9. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-017-0859-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  70. Discoverers of the galvanic skin response. Widacki J. 2015European Polygraph. 9(4):209–220. doi: 10.1515/ep-2015-0008. https://doi.org/10.1515/ep-2015-0008 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  71. The amygdala mediates the emotional modulation of threat-elicited skin conductance response. Wood K. H., Ver Hoef L. W., Knight D. C. 2014Emotion. 14(4):693–700. doi: 10.1037/a0036636. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036636 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  72. The effects of traveling in different transport modes on galvanic skin response (GSR) as a measure of stress: An observational study. Yang X., McCoy E., Anaya-Boig E., Avila-Palencia I., Brand C., Carrasco-Turigas G., Dons E., Gerike R., Goetschi T., Nieuwenhuijsen M., Orjuela J. P., Panis L. I., Standaert A., de Nazelle A. 2021Environment International. 156:106764. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2021.106764. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2021.106764 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  73. Guilt in the eyes: Eye movement and physiological evidence for guilt-induced social avoidance. Yu H., Duan Y., Zhou X. 2017Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 71:128–137. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2017.03.007. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2017.03.007 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  74. Cerebral correlates of skin conductance responses in a cognitive task. Zhang S., Hu S., Chao H. H., Luo X., Farr O. M., Li C.-s. R. 2013Neuroimage. 62(3):1489–1498. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.05.036. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.05.036 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Undergraduate Neuroscience Education are provided here courtesy of Faculty for Undergraduate Neuroscience

RESOURCES