The fingers are widely accepted as the gold standard for skin conductance (SC) recording, with the feet as a strong alternative. However, there are gaps in the current literature comparing these sites. There is also a great deal of interest in alternative recording sites to permit mobility, but data evaluating these are few and inconsistent. The present report compared multiple sites (fingers, abductor hallucis of the foot, arch of the foot, toes, forehead, and wrist) from 45 college student participants in a short‐term sedentary laboratory setting and found large variation in both tonic and phasic SC responses, as well as crucial lapses in responding at nonpalmar sites. Across‐site correlations between participants and within participants were also examined. The present data show that, in the laboratory setting employing commonly used recording techniques and stimuli, the nonpalmar sites are generally less responsive than the fingers, and the wrist in particular is the lowest in responding, whereas the toes are most similar to the fingers in responding. Within‐participant correlations between the fingers and other sites were greatest for the plantar sites and least for the forehead.