This literature review presents summary methodological and statistical data on 33 studies in which critical flicker frequency (CFF) thresholds were used to evaluate the effects of acute oral doses of single psychotropic drugs in normal human subjects. In all, 96 drug-dose-study combinations are represented. CFF was found to be altered to a statistically significant degree (P is less than 0.05) in 51 (65%) of the 79 instances in which inferential statistical methods were used to evaluate the results. As expected, stimulants increased CFF while hypnotics decreased it. There is also a discussion of important methodological considerations in the design of psychopharmacological studies employing CFF. While many studies have shown CFF to be sensitive to the effects of psychotropic drugs, there have not always been adequate controls for extraneous factors (especially, set and suggestion, changes in pupillary diameter, and the presence of other commonly used drugs). Finally, consideration is given to the attempts to increase the sensitivity of the CFF test to drug effects.

Critical flicker frequency (CFF) and psychotropic drugs in normal human subjects-a review.

Cross-validation of the Halstead-Reitan tests for brain damage.

Arousal responses to emotional stimuli and laterality of lesion.

Neuropsychological changes in adolescents with insulin-dependent diabetes.

Frontal lobe lesions and electrodermal activity: effects of significance.

Two independent experiments were performed in which skin resistance levels, transformed to log skin conductance levels (SCLs), and GSRs of brain-damaged (BD) and non-brain-damaged (NBD) patients were measured under varying task demands. Cross-validated results indicate that BD had significantly higher log SCLs and GRSs than NBD over conditions. Patterns of correlations between and within measures of arousal and performance were similar in both experiments and tended to differ for BD compared to NBD. Positive correlations between arousal measures and performance in the BD suggest that their impaired performance cannot be ascribed to non-optimal levels of arousal, at least as measured electrodermally. A group of schizophrenics subjected to the same experimental conditions had levels of electrodermal activity and performance which were intermediate to those of BD and NBD. Other results suggest that different psychophysiological relationships exist in BD and schizophrenic patients. The hypothesis that brain-damage leads to release of inhibitory control over systems involved in electrodermal activity seems worthy of further investigation.

Electrodermal indicants oe arousal in brain damage: cross‐validated eindings

Examinations of 100 brain-damaged and 50 non-brain-damaged indicate satisfactory cross-validation of a method for detection of brain damage by flicker perimetry. 73% of the brain-damaged and 70% of the non-brain-damaged were correctly identified.

Identification of brain damage by flicker perimetry: a second cross-validation.

In 1951, P . W . Miles reported that plotting visual fields by determining thresholds for a flickering light had many advantages over standard visual field techniques, including that of greater sensitivity in the identification of visual defects associated with brain damage. Later Heavener & Henderson (1954) using Miles’ technique, compared the results of standard visual field and flicker perimetry cxaminations in 20 cases with neurological defects. In general they concluded that the two methods gave rise to approximately the same results, but that the flicker technique did seem to be superior to standard perimetry in detecting early lesions of the visual pathways. In neither of these studies, however, were there independent judgments ( i . e . , by different judges) of the flicker and standard visual field data, and the quantitative possibilities inherent in the flicker perimetry technique were not utilized. In several studies (Parsons & Huse 1958; Parsons & Gottlieb 1960; Chandler, Parsons & Haase 1964) we have described a quantified empirically derived “Visual Impairment Score” based on thresholds for flicker throughout the visual field. The use of this score has resulted in correct identification of 74 per cent of brain-damaged and non-braindamaged cases. While it is evident that this technique has promise, utilization for either research or clinical purposes with brain-damaged patients could only be justified if it provided information which dif-

Comparison of flicker perimetry and standard visual fields in brain-damaged patients1

Localization of Brain Lesions by Flicker Perimetry: A Quantitative Method

Flicker discrimination in relation to nature and severity of CNS dysfunction.

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

Peter J. Chandler

Author Tools

Chat about Author