JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN PERSONALITY 10, 437-445 (1976)

Habituation and Dishabituation of the Electrodermal

Orienting Reflex in Relation to
Extraversion and Neuroticism

MICHAEL J. WIGGLESWORTH AND BARRY D. SMITH

University of Maryland

Orienting reflex (OR) habituationand dishabituationmay be influencedby

individual difference variables, including Eysenck’s Extraversion (E) and
Neuroticism (N) dimensions. Ninety subjects formed nine groupsbasedon the
crossover of high, medium, and low E and N. Each subject received, at each of
two auditory stimulus intensities, two blocks of tone presentations. The last
standard stimulus trial was followed by a novel stimulus and four repetitions of the
standard stimulus. Using square root SCR, extraverts showed smaller initial
response amplitudes than introverts at the low intensity of stimulation, while the
reverse was true at high intensity. E and N were unrelated to SCR habituation
rate. However, extraverts showed no dishabituation, while introverts did dis-
habituate.

The hypotheses of Sokolov (1960, 1963) relating to stimulus intensity

effects (Davis & Wagner, 1969; Groves & Thompson, 1970) and to the
return of responding to the standard stimulus (SS) following the interposi-
tion of a novel stimulus, i.e., dishabituation (O’Gorman, 1973), have not
received consistent support. Studies of dishabituation have yielded par-
ticularly mixed results. Some investigators report clear evidence for dis-
habituation (Furedy & Scull, 1971; Zimny & Schwabe, 1966), others
report only a response to the novel or test stimulus (TS) and not to the
dishabituation stimulus (Yaremko, Blair & Leckhart, 1970), and still
others report no significant responding to either stimulus (Fried, Korn &
Welch, 1966; Fried, Welch, & Friedman, 1%6). Moreover, while any
change in a stimulus should produce an OR, decreases in intensity of the
test stimulus have done so in some studies (Bernstein, 1968; 1%9), but
not in others (James & Hughes, 1959; O’Gorman, Mangan & Gowen, 1970;
Edwards, Note 1).
Given the diverse results in this literature, it is particularly relevant that
some reviewers and theorists have noted the probable importance of
individual difference variables in habituation and dishabituation

The authors thank Dan Church for his aid in running subjects. Computer time was made
available by the Computer Science Center at the University of Maryland. Requests for
reprints should be made to Barry D. Smith, Department of Psychology, University of
Maryland, College Park, MD 20742.

437
Copyright @ 1976 by Academic Press, Inc.
All rights of reproduction in any form reserved.
438 WIGGLESWORTH AND SMITH

phenomena (O’Gorman, 1973; Groves & Thompson, 1970). Since these

two phenomena are thought to involve the interplay of excitatory and
inhibitory processes (Sokolov, 1963; Groves & Thompson, 1970), it may
be that individual difference dimensions postulated to reflect differences
in excitation and inhibition can help to account for dishabituation results.
One theoretical model proposes two such individual difference dimen-
sions, extraversion and neuroticism, based specifically on excitatory and
inhibitory processes (Eysenck, 1967).
Some investigators have previously applied the Eysenck model to
habituation and related phenomena with somewhat mixed results. Rele-
vant investigations have selected subjects on the basis of the Eysenck
measures of neuroticism (N) and extraversion (E) and have involved
repeated presentations of either mild tones (Mangan & O’Gorman, 1%9;
Coles, Gale, & Kline, 1971) or consonant trigrams (Sadler, Mefferd, &
Houck, 1971). The amplitude of the phasic electrodermal response to the
initial stimulus has been found to relate to both extraversion (Mangan &
O’Gorman, 1969) and neuroticism (Mangan & O’Gorman, 1969; Or-
lebeke, 1973), though some other studies are not supportive of these
findings (Coles et al., 1971; Sadler et al., 1971). Habituation rate has also
been found to relate to both neuroticism (Coles et al., 1971) and extraver-
sion (Mangan & O’Gorman, 1969). Another investigation, using a median
split to establish high and low N and E groups, attributed to chance a
single significant F ratio relating N and E to habituation (Koriat, Averill,
& Malmstrom, 1973).
The present study focused on the relationship of the Eysenck dimen-
sions to dishabituation, a process not studied in the work noted above and
one which has yielded mixed results and been particularly problematic for
Sokolov’s theory (O’Gorman, 1973). In addition, present work was con-
cerned with the interactive effects of stimulus intensity and the Eysenck
dimensions on both dishabituation and habituation processes. Finally,
there was major concern with the selection of the personality groups
employed. Specifically, an attempt was made to select very extreme
groups from a large initial sample (over 600 subjects as compared with
much smaller numbers in earlier work) and to examine all nine groups
formed by a three-way breakdown (high, middle, low) on each of the two
Eysenck dimensions.
METHOD
Subjects
The Eysenck Personality Inventory (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1968) Form A, was administered
to 645 students in an introductory psychology course at the University of Maryland. The test
yields scores on Extraversion (E) and Neuroticism(N), as well as Lie (L) scores as a validity
check. From the total sample, 90 subjects were selected to form nine groups of five males and
 EXTRAVERSION AND OR DISHABITUATION 439

five females. The nine groups represented high, medium, and low N crossing with high,
medium, and low E. High and low groups were defined by scores of at least one SD above or
below the normative means on the respective scales, and medium groups by scores within .5
SD of the normative means. One criterion ultimately had to be eased slightly in order to fill all
the cells. Specifically, the cutoff for low N groups was changed from a score of 6 on the N scale
to 7. The subjects with the lowest L scores were used when there was a choice. It is worth
noting for future research that even with 645 initial subjects it was not possible to obtain more
than 10 for some extreme cells. The product-moment correlation between E and N for the
total group of 645 subjects was -.04. The means for E (12.4) and N (11.8) were within one
point of the normative means of 13.1 and 10.9, respectively (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1968).

Apparatus
Skin resistance was recorded on a Grass Model 5 polygraph, using a Model S-P1 low level dc
preamplifier. Zinc electrodes, 2.22 cm in diameter and set in a plastic cup, were employed,
along with a zinc sulfate electrolyte. Current density was 10.12 PA/cm*. Tones of 0.5~set
duration were recorded and presented with a Sony tape deck and amplifier, splicing leader
tape between tones to avoid print-through. Auditory stimuli were delivered through matched,
calibrated earphones in a sound attenuated chamber.

Procedure
Upon entering the laboratory, the subject completed a four-item state anxiety question-
naire, then was seated in a comfortable chair with a footstool in the sound chamber. Instruc-
tions told the subject that he or she would hear a series of tones through the earphones, that a
physiological response would be recorded through electrodes but no shocks would be ad-
ministered, and that he or she should simply attend to the tones and avoid movement ofthe left
arm. While instructions were being given, the skin surface was cleaned with alcohol, and the
electrodes were attached to the left palm and the back of the left wrist, using plastic clamps.
The experimenter then left the chamber, and a 6-min prestimulation period preceded the first
stimulus.
Following the prestimulation period, each subject received: (a) 20 SS tones of 1000 HZ,
with interstimulus interval (ISI) randomly varied between 15 and 25 set; (b) an 80-set
nonstimulation period; (c) 10 additional tones with the same IS1 range. Steps (b) and (c)
allowed for spontaneous recovery and rehabituation of the response to provide more stable
habituation: (d) a 500 Hz, 0.5-set TS followed by four additional SSs, providing a basis for
the examination of the test response and dishabituation. The above series was presented
twice to each subject, once at 80 db, once at 100 db (re BOO2 dynes/cm’). A 2 min inter-
block interval with no stimulation occurred between intensities. The sequence of presenta-
tion of intensities was counterbalanced, such that an equal number of subjects in each EPI
group received each sequence. At the end of the session the subject again completed the
anxiety questionnaire and a screening questionnaire concerning alcohol and drug usage,
hearing loss, and brain damage. Eight subjects were dropped on the basis of the latter
questionnaire.

RESULTS
The basic analysis of variance design was a three-between, two-
within-subjects model. Levels of E(3), levels of N (3), and sequence of
intensity presentation (Hi-Lo, Lo-Hi) were between-subjects. Intensity
(80 and 100 db) was within-subjects, as was trial, in those analyses
involving two trials at each intensity.
440 WIGGLESWORTH AND SMITH

Response Measures
Any decrease in resistance beginning between 1 and 4 set after tone
onset was considered a response to the tone. The square root SCR values
analyzed were determined as the square root of the difference in mi-
cromhos between the reciprocals of pre- and post-stimulus resistance
values. The square root transformation was utilized to normalize the data.
Habituation of tone-specific responses was defined as occurring with two
successive responses of less than 1000 ohms.
Initial Amplitude and Habituation Rate
As expected, there was a significant effect of intensity, F (1, 72) =
45.10, p < .OOl, on the amplitude of responses to Trial 1, the 100 db tone
producing larger responses (a mean of 1.26) than the 80 db tone (.85). The
sequence effect, F (1, 72) = 6.09, p < .025, and the intensity x sequence
interaction, F (1, 72) = 15.36, p < .OOl, were also significant. Means for
the high-low and low-high sequences were, respectively, 0.93 and 1.78.
The interaction was due to the fact that means for the high intensity
were nearly identical under the two sequences (1.25 and 1.26), while the
low intensity mean was smaller in the high-low sequence (0.61) than in
the low-high sequence (1.09). In addition, the extraversion x intensity
interaction (Fig. 1) was significant, F (2, 72) = 4.50,~ < .025. Extraverts
showed the smallest initial response to the 80 db tone, introverts the
largest. However, at 100 db, the order of groups was reversed.
The E and N variables were unrelated to habituation rate. The effect of
intensity was significant, subjects requiring longer to habituate to the 100

Intensity (db)

FIG. 1. Initial response amplitude as a function of extraversion and stimulus intensity.

 EXTRAVERSION AND OR DISHABITUATION 441

db tone (14.4 mean trials) than to the 80 db tone (6.6 trials). The sequence
effect and the intensity x sequence interaction were also significant.
To allow for the possibility that responses may start again after the
habituation criterion has been reached, the total responses made by each
subject were entered into a separate analysis. The pattern of results was
similar to that on the trials to habituation measure, with significant effects
of intensity, F (1, 72) = 193.83, p < .OOl, and the sequence x intensity
interaction, F (1, 72) = 27.84, p < .OOl, but no N or E effects.
Test Responses and Dishabituation
Analyses of the test response involved the last SS (Trial 30) and the TS
(Trial 31). As was expected, there was a larger response to the TS than to
the preceding SS, leading to a significant trial effect, F (1, 72) = 170.04, p
< .OOl . The mean response amplitude for the SS was .21, and that for the
TS was .73. The effect of intensity, F (1, 72) = 41.03,~ < .OOl, indicated
that the increase in response amplitude across both trials was greater at
100 db than at 80 db.
The analyses of dishabituation involved the last SS (Trial 30) and the
repetition of the SS (Trial 32) following the interposition of the TS. The
intensity effect was significant, F (1, 72) = 36.24, p < .OOl, as in other
.analyses. The interaction of extraversion with trial, F (2, 72) = 7.19, p <
.005 (Fig. 2) resulted from the fact that introverts (Low E subjects)
showed the greatest degree of dishabituation and extraverts the least
dishabituation. In fact, the latter group showed no dishabituation at all, as
their response on Trial 32 was slightly smaller than that on Trial 30.

0.42 -

0.38 -

a34 -
5
; 0.30 -
‘0
a” 0.26 -
u
s
g 0.22-

0.18
t

of T 30 T 32

Trials

FIG. 2. Dishabituation response amplitude as a function of extraversion.

442 WIGGLESWORTH AND SMITH

Nonspecific Responses and Spontaneous Recovery

Total nonspecific responses during combined stimulation and 80-set
interintensity nonstimulation periods were determined for each subject.
There were no reliable effects.
The last trial preceding the nonstimulation period and the first trial
following that period were entered into an analysis of the spontaneous
recovery of the OR. A significant effect of trial, F (1, 72) = 37.78, p <
.OOl, indicated that there was a significant amount of spontaneous recov-
ery of the habituated response. Means for Trials 20 and 21 were .24 and
.51, respectively. The only other significant effect was that of intensity.

Anxiety Questionnaire
Separate anxiety questionnaire scores were determined pre- and post-
experimentally for each subject. Analysis of variance yielded a significant
effect of occasion (pre vs. post), F (1, 81) = 19.05, p < .OOl, reflecting a
decrease in anxiety over the experimental session. The main effect of
neuroticism, F (2, 81) = 4.60, p < .025, was due to higher anxiety in high
than medium or low neurotic subjects. A significant interaction of ex-
traversion with neuroticism was also seen, F (4, 81) = 2.60,~ < .05. Both
extraverts and ambiverts (middle group) showed increasing anxiety as
neuroticism increased. However, introverts showed a pattern of lowest
anxiety in the middle-neuroticism group,

DISCUSSION
Present results support, first, the effectiveness of the principal experi-
mental manipulations utilized in the study. One indication is the consis-
tent presence of an intensity effect, indicating larger phasic response
magnitudes to high than low intensity stimulation. In addition, habituation
rate was inversely related to intensity, as in previous research (Dickinson
& Smith, 1973). Further, the interaction of sequence with intensity
showed that responses to low intensity stimulation were decreased by
prior exposure to high intensity, while high intensity responses were
essentially unaffected by sequence. Finally, results indicated that there
was both a response to the TS and a dishabituation response to the
following SS, thus making possible group comparisons concerned with
dishabituation. Present findings concerning dishabituation were suppor-
tive of some previous literature reporting either a response to the TS
(Furedy, 1968; Gabriel & Ball, 1970; Grim & White, 1965; Yaremko et al.,
1970) or a dishabituation response to the following SS (Furedy & Scull,
1971) or both (McCubbin 8z Katkin, 1971; Zimny & Schwabe, 1%6).
The relationship of dishabituation to extraversion and neuroticism was
the primary focus of the present study, which also examined other
 EXTRAVERSION AND OR DISHABITUATION 443

psychophysiological variables. The assessment of the independent effects

of the two personality dimensions showed that neuroticism was unrelated
to the psychophysiological variables, while extraversion did relate signif-
icantly to some aspects of responding. First, the E dimension interacted
with stimulus intensity to affect initial response amplitude, such that
extraverts were more responsive than introverts under high intensity
stimulation, while the reverse was true at a lower intensity. The finding is
consistent with earlier work on the relative salivary responsivity of intro-
verts and extraverts to weak and strong stimulation (Eysenck & Eysenck,
1967). Specifically, it was found that introverts showed larger responses
than extraverts to a relatively mild stimulus of lemon juice on the tongue,
but a relatively smaller response increment when a stronger stimulus
(swallowing lemon juice) was presented. Previous electrodermal studies of
initial response have not systematically varied stimulus intensity, and
results have been mixed, with extraverts more responsive in one study
(Mangan & O’Gorman, 1969) and introverts more responsive in another
(Orlebeke, 1973).
The reversal in relative response amplitudes of the two personality
groups at lower and higher stimulus intensities can readily be interpreted
in terms of the close similarity between the extraversion-introversion
dimension (Eysenck, 1967) and the Russian dimension of strength of the
nervous system (Teplov, 1964; Nebylitsyn, 1966). Essentially, introver-
sion corresponds to the weak nervous system, extraversion to the strong
nervous system (Eysenck, 1966; Gray, 1%7). The weak nervous system is
more sensitive to stimulation, giving larger responses at low stimulus
intensities and showing transmarginal inhibition and consequent response
decrement at high intensities (Gray, 1964, 1967). Introverts in the present
study displayed essentially this pattern of initial responses relative to
extraverts.
While the more highly aroused introvert may reduce initial responding
under high intensity stimulation, Eysenck (1967) hypothesizes that with
repeated stimulation it is the extravert who accumulates greater amounts
of inhibition and hence should show reduced responding. Support for this
hypothesis is seen in the present data indicating that introverts showed
clear dishabituation following the interposition of a novel (test) stimulus,
while extraverts did not. Since the degree of novelty needed to disinhibit
is directly related to the amount of inhibition present (Sokolov, 1963), it
can be hypothesized that the test stimulus was not sufficiently novel to
produce dishabituation in the more (physiologically) inhibited extraverts.
If this theoretical account is accurate, it may be possible in further
research to demonstrate that a more novel (i.e., more discrepant) stimu-
lus, possibly one in a different modality from the habituation stimulus,
will produce dishabituation in the extraverted group.
 444 WIGGLESWORTH AND SMITH

Overall, present results support the observation that individual differ-

ences may affect the dishabituation process (O’Gorman, 1973; Groves &
Thompson, 1970), as well as the amplitude of initial responses. In addi-
tion, support is provided for specific aspects of Eysenck’s (1967) theory.
Finally, it was found that the relationship between extraversion and initial
response amplitude is a function of stimulus intensity, suggesting the need
for further examination of the role of intensity in mediating the influence
of individual difference variables on psychophysiological functioning.
REFERENCES
Bernstein, A. S. The orienting response and the direction of stimulus change. Psychonomic
Science, 1968, 12, 127-128.
Bernstein, A. S. To what does the orienting response respond. Psychophysiology, 1969, 6,
338-350.
Coles, M. G. H., Gale, A., & Kline, P. Personality and habituation of the orienting reaction:
Tonic and response measures of electrodermal activity. Psychophysiology, 1971, 8,
54-63.
Davis, M., & Wagner, A. R. Habituation of startle response under incremental sequence of
stimulus intensities. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1969, 67,
486-492.
Dickinson, J. R., & Smith, B. D. Nonspecific activity and habituation of tonic and phasic
skin conductance in somatic complainers and controls as a function of auditory stimulus
intensity. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 1973, 82, 404-413.
Eysenck, H. J. Conditioning, introversion-extraversion and the strength of the nervous
system. Procedures of the 18th International Congress of Experimental Psychology,
Moscow. Ninth Symposium, 1966, 33-44.
Eysenck, H. J. The biological basis of personality. Springfield, Illinois: Thomas, 1967.
Eysenck, H. J., & Eysenck, S. B. G. Manual of the Eysenck Personality Inventory. San
Diego: Educational and Industrial Testing Service, 1968.
Eysenck, S. B. G. & Eysenck, H. J. Salivary response to lemon juice as a measure of
introversion. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1967, 24, 1047-1053.
Fried, R., Kom, S., & Welch, L. Effect of change in sequential visual stimuli on GSR
adaptation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1966, 72, 325-327.
Fried, R., Welch, L., & Friedman, M. Stimulus novelty and intraseries primacy in GSR
adaptation. Perception and Psychophysics, 1966, 1, 345-346.
Furedy, J. J. Novelty and the measurement of the GSR. Journal of Experimental Psychol-
ogy, 1968, 76, 501-503.
Furedy, J. J., & Scull, J. Orienting-reaction theory and an increase of the human GSR
following stimulus change which is unpredictable but not contrary to prediction. Jour-
nal of Experimental Psychology, 1971, 88, 292-294.
Gabriel, M., & Ball, T. S. Plethysmographic and GSR response to single versus double-
stimultaneous novel tactile stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1970, 85,
368-373.
Gray, J. A. Pavlov’s typology, New York: Macmillan, 1964.
Gray, J. A. Strength of the nervous system, introversion-extraversion, conditionability and
arousal. Behavior Research and Therapy, 1967, 5, 151-170.
Grim, P. F., & White, J. H. Effects of stimulus change on GSR and reaction time. Journal of
Experimental Psychology, 1965, 69, 276-28 1.
Groves, P. M., & Thompson, R. F. Habituation: A dual-process theory. Psychological
Review, 1970, 77, 419-450.
 EXTRAVERSION AND OR DISHABITUATION 445

James, J. P., & Hughes, G. R. Habituation of the orienting response as a function of

individual differences in anxiety and autonomic lability. Journal ofAbnormal Psychol-
ogy, 1%9, 74, 54-60.
Koriat, A., Averill, J. R., & Malmstrom, E. J. Individual differences in habituation: Some
methodological and conceptual issues. Journal of Experimental Research in Personal-
ity, 1973,7,88-101.
Mangan, G. L., & O’Gorman, J. G. Initial amplitude and rate of habituation of orienting
reaction in relation to extraversion and neuroticism. Journal of Experimental Research
in Personality, 1969, 3, 275-282.
McCubbin, R. J., & Katkin, E. S. Magnitude of the orienting response as a function of
extent and quality of stimulus change. Journal ofExperimental Psychology, 1971, 88,
182-188.
Nebylitsyn, V. B. Fundamental properties of the human nervous system. Moscow: Akad.
Pedagog. Nauk RSFSR, 1966.
O’Gorman, J. G. Change in stimulus conditions and the orienting response. Psychophysiol-
ogy, 1973, 10, 465-470.
O’Gorman, J. G., Mangan, G. L., and Gowen, J. Selective habituation of the galvanic skin
response component of the orientation reaction to an auditory stimulus. Psychophysiol-
ogy, 1970, 6, 716-721.
Orlebeke, J. F. Electrodermal, vasomotor and heart rate correlates of extraversion and
neuroticism. Psychophysiology, 1973, 10, 211.
Sadler, T. G., Mefferd, R. B. Jr., and Houck, R. L. The interaction of extraversion and
neuroticism in orienting response habituation. Psychophysiology, 1971, 8, 312-318.
Sokolov, E. N. Neuronal models and the orienting reflex. In M. A. Brazier (Ed.), The central
nervous system and behavior. New York: Josiah Macy, Jr. Foundation, 1960. Pp.
187-276.
Sokolov, D. N. Perception and the condition reflex. Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1963.
Teplov, B. M. Problems in the study of general types of higher nervous activity in man and
animals. In J. A. Gray (Ed.), Pavlov’s typology. New York: Macmillan, 1964. Pp.
3-153.
Yaremko, R. M., Blair, M. W., & Leckhart, B. T. The orienting reflex to changes in a
conceptual stimulus dimension. Psychonomic Science, 1970, 21, 115-l 16.
Zimny, G. H. & Schwabe, L. W. Stimulus change and habituation of the orienting response.
Psychophysiology, 1966, 2, 103-l 15.

REFERENCE NOTE
1. Edwards, D. C. Habituation of the galvanic skin response to simple stimuli. Paper
presented at the meeting of the Society for Psychophysiological Research, Clayton, Mis-
souri, October 1971.