Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
The fingers and feet have long been accepted as optimal anatomical recording sites for electrodermal activity. The available literature suggests that the feet are more responsive than the fingers. The present report compared skin conductance level (SCL) and responses (SCRs) from the left foot and the distal phalanges of the fingers on the nondominant hand among 19 participants. The principal results were (a) SCRs recorded from the fingers were significantly larger and more frequent with shorter latencies than SCRs from the foot, (b) SCL from the fingers was significantly higher than from the foot, (c) the fingers exhibited significantly greater discrimination conditioning than the foot, and (d) skin conductance measures recorded from the fingers and foot were significantly positively correlated. Specifically, our results demonstrate that the distal phalanges of the fingers are electrodermally more responsive than the abductor hallucis area of the foot.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/psyp.12093 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!