Adaptation in attentional cautiousness among highly sensitive persons: Evidence from spatial cueing paradigm

IF 2.6 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL Personality and Individual Differences Pub Date : 2025-04-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-11 DOI:10.1016/j.paid.2025.113042
Luchuan Xiao (肖鲁川), Kris Baetens, Natacha Deroost
{"title":"Adaptation in attentional cautiousness among highly sensitive persons: Evidence from spatial cueing paradigm","authors":"Luchuan Xiao (肖鲁川),&nbsp;Kris Baetens,&nbsp;Natacha Deroost","doi":"10.1016/j.paid.2025.113042","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Individuals with higher sensory processing sensitivity (SPS) exhibit heightened cautiousness during attentional orienting. This study investigated how expectancy influences SPS-related cautiousness in two experiments using a spatial cueing paradigm. Spatial cues either validly or invalidly signaled the location of subsequent target stimuli. Experiment 1 manipulated cue-target predictivity at 80 % and 50 % probabilities. The results indicated that higher SPS was associated with a decreased validity effect in both probability conditions, suggesting that individuals with higher SPS tend to treat valid and invalid cues similarly. Experiment 2 expanded this manipulation to include probabilities of 100 %, 80 %, and 50 %. The results confirmed that higher SPS was associated with a decreased validity effect. Additionally, individuals with higher SPS responded more slowly; however, this slowing diminished as valid probability approached full predictivity (100 %), compared to partial probabilities (50 % and 80 %). The decreased validity effect associated with higher SPS supports the notion of heightened cautiousness in attentional orienting among highly sensitive individuals. Moreover, our findings suggest that highly sensitive individuals prefer predictable events, but can adapt their cautious attentional approach in response to varying expectancy levels. This study empirically links SPS to a preference for greater certainty while simultaneously showing adaptability under uncertain conditions.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48467,"journal":{"name":"Personality and Individual Differences","volume":"237 ","pages":"Article 113042"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Personality and Individual Differences","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886925000042","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Individuals with higher sensory processing sensitivity (SPS) exhibit heightened cautiousness during attentional orienting. This study investigated how expectancy influences SPS-related cautiousness in two experiments using a spatial cueing paradigm. Spatial cues either validly or invalidly signaled the location of subsequent target stimuli. Experiment 1 manipulated cue-target predictivity at 80 % and 50 % probabilities. The results indicated that higher SPS was associated with a decreased validity effect in both probability conditions, suggesting that individuals with higher SPS tend to treat valid and invalid cues similarly. Experiment 2 expanded this manipulation to include probabilities of 100 %, 80 %, and 50 %. The results confirmed that higher SPS was associated with a decreased validity effect. Additionally, individuals with higher SPS responded more slowly; however, this slowing diminished as valid probability approached full predictivity (100 %), compared to partial probabilities (50 % and 80 %). The decreased validity effect associated with higher SPS supports the notion of heightened cautiousness in attentional orienting among highly sensitive individuals. Moreover, our findings suggest that highly sensitive individuals prefer predictable events, but can adapt their cautious attentional approach in response to varying expectancy levels. This study empirically links SPS to a preference for greater certainty while simultaneously showing adaptability under uncertain conditions.
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
高敏感人群注意谨慎的适应:来自空间线索范式的证据
具有较高感觉加工敏感性(SPS)的个体在注意定向过程中表现出更高的谨慎性。本研究采用空间线索范式,在两个实验中探讨了期望如何影响sps相关的谨慎性。空间线索可以有效或无效地提示后续目标刺激的位置。实验1在80%和50%的概率下操纵线索-目标预测。结果表明,在两种概率条件下,高SPS与低效度效应相关,表明高SPS个体倾向于相似地对待有效和无效线索。实验2将这种操作扩展到包括100%、80%和50%的概率。结果证实,较高的SPS与降低的效度效应相关。此外,SPS高的个体反应更慢;然而,与部分概率(50%和80%)相比,当有效概率接近完全预测(100%)时,这种减缓会减弱。低效度效应与高SPS相关,支持了高敏感个体注意导向中高度谨慎的概念。此外,我们的研究结果表明,高度敏感的个体更喜欢可预测的事件,但可以根据不同的期望水平调整他们谨慎的注意力方式。本研究从经验上将SPS与更大确定性的偏好联系起来,同时在不确定条件下表现出适应性。
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
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
4.70%
发文量
577
审稿时长
41 days
期刊介绍: Personality and Individual Differences is devoted to the publication of articles (experimental, theoretical, review) which aim to integrate as far as possible the major factors of personality with empirical paradigms from experimental, physiological, animal, clinical, educational, criminological or industrial psychology or to seek an explanation for the causes and major determinants of individual differences in concepts derived from these disciplines. The editors are concerned with both genetic and environmental causes, and they are particularly interested in possible interaction effects.
期刊最新文献
Charisma is not just for the bold: Connecting tripartite narcissism and self-reports of charisma aspects Social support and prosocial decisions in times of distress: Helping a single recipient versus multiple recipients Development and validation of the individual and social music listening scale (ISMUS-LI) Proportionality as a predictor of utilitarian sacrifices: Evidence from the Polish MFQ-2 Sensing a rift in reality: Validation of the self-world existential isolation scale
×
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:604180095
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