Attentional bias towards task-irrelevant threatening faces reduces working memory updating efficiency in social anxiety: evidence from the n-back task combining with eye-tracking.

IF 2.6 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Cognition & Emotion Pub Date : 2024-11-19 DOI:10.1080/02699931.2024.2430402
Chi-Wen Liang
{"title":"Attentional bias towards task-irrelevant threatening faces reduces working memory updating efficiency in social anxiety: evidence from the <i>n</i>-back task combining with eye-tracking.","authors":"Chi-Wen Liang","doi":"10.1080/02699931.2024.2430402","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Anxiety can impair the central executive functioning in working memory (WM). Further, the adverse effect of anxiety on the central executive would be greater when threat-related distractors are present. This study investigated the effect of task-irrelevant emotional faces on WM updating in social anxiety. Forty-one socially anxious (SA) and thirty-nine non-anxious (NA) participants completed an emotional face interference <i>n</i>-back task coupled with eye movement recording. The results showed that, in the 2-back task, SA participants had longer reaction times in the angry-neutral and neutral-neutral interference conditions than in the no-interference condition, whereas NA participants had longer reaction times in the happy-neutral and neutral-neutral interference conditions than in the no-interference condition. In addition, SA participants initially fixated on angry faces more frequently and spent more time looking at them, whereas NA participants initially fixated on happy faces more frequently and spent more time looking at them. This study suggests that attentional bias towards social threats reduces the efficiency rather than effectiveness of WM updating in social anxiety. Moreover, SA individuals are better at resisting interference from task-irrelevant positive stimuli, while NA individuals are better at resisting interference from task-irrelevant threatening stimuli.</p>","PeriodicalId":48412,"journal":{"name":"Cognition & Emotion","volume":" ","pages":"1-8"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognition & Emotion","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2024.2430402","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Anxiety can impair the central executive functioning in working memory (WM). Further, the adverse effect of anxiety on the central executive would be greater when threat-related distractors are present. This study investigated the effect of task-irrelevant emotional faces on WM updating in social anxiety. Forty-one socially anxious (SA) and thirty-nine non-anxious (NA) participants completed an emotional face interference n-back task coupled with eye movement recording. The results showed that, in the 2-back task, SA participants had longer reaction times in the angry-neutral and neutral-neutral interference conditions than in the no-interference condition, whereas NA participants had longer reaction times in the happy-neutral and neutral-neutral interference conditions than in the no-interference condition. In addition, SA participants initially fixated on angry faces more frequently and spent more time looking at them, whereas NA participants initially fixated on happy faces more frequently and spent more time looking at them. This study suggests that attentional bias towards social threats reduces the efficiency rather than effectiveness of WM updating in social anxiety. Moreover, SA individuals are better at resisting interference from task-irrelevant positive stimuli, while NA individuals are better at resisting interference from task-irrelevant threatening stimuli.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对与任务无关的威胁性面孔的注意偏差降低了社交焦虑症患者的工作记忆更新效率:结合眼动跟踪的 n-back 任务提供的证据。
焦虑会损害工作记忆(WM)的中枢执行功能。此外,当存在与威胁相关的分心物时,焦虑对中枢执行的不利影响会更大。本研究调查了与任务无关的情绪面孔对社交焦虑中工作记忆更新的影响。41 名社交焦虑(SA)参与者和 39 名非焦虑(NA)参与者完成了一项与眼动记录相结合的情绪面孔干扰 N 回任务。结果表明,在2-back任务中,SA参与者在愤怒-中性和中性-中性干扰条件下的反应时间长于无干扰条件下的反应时间,而NA参与者在快乐-中性和中性-中性干扰条件下的反应时间长于无干扰条件下的反应时间。此外,SA 参与者最初更频繁地将注意力集中在愤怒的面孔上,并花更多的时间观察它们,而 NA 参与者最初更频繁地将注意力集中在快乐的面孔上,并花更多的时间观察它们。这项研究表明,对社交威胁的注意偏差降低了社交焦虑中 WM 更新的效率,而不是有效性。此外,SA 人更善于抵抗与任务无关的积极刺激的干扰,而 NA 人则更善于抵抗与任务无关的威胁性刺激的干扰。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Cognition & Emotion
Cognition & Emotion PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
7.70%
发文量
90
期刊介绍: Cognition & Emotion is devoted to the study of emotion, especially to those aspects of emotion related to cognitive processes. The journal aims to bring together work on emotion undertaken by researchers in cognitive, social, clinical, and developmental psychology, neuropsychology, and cognitive science. Examples of topics appropriate for the journal include the role of cognitive processes in emotion elicitation, regulation, and expression; the impact of emotion on attention, memory, learning, motivation, judgements, and decisions.
期刊最新文献
Stimulus processing bias in anxiety-related fear generalisation: drift-diffusion modelling and subgroups differences. The appraisal patterns and response types of enthusiasm: a comparison with joy and hope. Persistent negative self-referent thinking in the context of depression: examining the role of temperament and emotion regulation. Attentional bias towards task-irrelevant threatening faces reduces working memory updating efficiency in social anxiety: evidence from the n-back task combining with eye-tracking. Impact of awe on topic interest and recognition memory for information in planetarium films.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1