Trait-Anxious People Take Longer to Search for Happy Faces in the Presence of Neutral and Fearful Distractors.

Q3 Psychology Trends in Psychology Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2023-06-22 DOI:10.1007/s43076-023-00305-8
Eda Tipura, David Souto, Elaine Fox
{"title":"Trait-Anxious People Take Longer to Search for Happy Faces in the Presence of Neutral and Fearful Distractors.","authors":"Eda Tipura, David Souto, Elaine Fox","doi":"10.1007/s43076-023-00305-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A large body of evidence suggests that processing of affective information is typically disrupted in anxiety. It has also been hypothesized that anxious individuals are less able to evaluate contextual cues and to respond in an adaptive way to stress. In the present study, 25 participants (16 females; 9 males) scoring high (scores of 45 or above) and 26 participants (13 females; 13 males) scoring low (scores of 35 and below) on a standardized measure of trait anxiety performed an emotion search task to investigate attentional biases when the task provides an explicit emotional context. An emotional context was set in each block by asking participants to look as quickly as possible at a face expressing a specific emotion, while eye movements were being recorded. On each trial, two faces appeared, one of them expressing the target emotion and the other one expressing a distractor emotion. High trait-anxious participants showed slower response times (time to look at the instructed emotion), regardless of the affective context, compared to the control group. Additionally, we found slower responses to happy faces (positive context) in the anxious group in the presence of neutral and fearful distractors. Cognitive control may therefore be disrupted in anxiety, as anxious people take longer to process (search for) happy faces, presumably because attentional resources are drawn by neutral and fearful distractors. Those differences were not observed in a simple reaction times task, which suggests that attentional biases, and not differential processing of low-level facial features, are responsible for those differences.</p>","PeriodicalId":37364,"journal":{"name":"Trends in Psychology","volume":" ","pages":"572-588"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11304531/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Trends in Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43076-023-00305-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/6/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A large body of evidence suggests that processing of affective information is typically disrupted in anxiety. It has also been hypothesized that anxious individuals are less able to evaluate contextual cues and to respond in an adaptive way to stress. In the present study, 25 participants (16 females; 9 males) scoring high (scores of 45 or above) and 26 participants (13 females; 13 males) scoring low (scores of 35 and below) on a standardized measure of trait anxiety performed an emotion search task to investigate attentional biases when the task provides an explicit emotional context. An emotional context was set in each block by asking participants to look as quickly as possible at a face expressing a specific emotion, while eye movements were being recorded. On each trial, two faces appeared, one of them expressing the target emotion and the other one expressing a distractor emotion. High trait-anxious participants showed slower response times (time to look at the instructed emotion), regardless of the affective context, compared to the control group. Additionally, we found slower responses to happy faces (positive context) in the anxious group in the presence of neutral and fearful distractors. Cognitive control may therefore be disrupted in anxiety, as anxious people take longer to process (search for) happy faces, presumably because attentional resources are drawn by neutral and fearful distractors. Those differences were not observed in a simple reaction times task, which suggests that attentional biases, and not differential processing of low-level facial features, are responsible for those differences.

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
特质焦虑的人在中性和恐惧的干扰物面前寻找快乐面孔的时间更长
大量证据表明,焦虑症患者对情感信息的处理通常会受到干扰。还有人假设,焦虑的人评估情境线索和以适应方式应对压力的能力较弱。在本研究中,25 名参与者(16 名女性;9 名男性)和 26 名参与者(13 名女性;13 名男性)在特质焦虑标准化测量中分别获得了高分(45 分或以上)和低分(35 分或以下),他们共同完成了一项情绪搜索任务,以研究在任务提供明确情绪情境时的注意偏差。每个区块都设置了一个情绪情境,要求参与者在记录眼球运动的同时,以最快的速度注视一张表达特定情绪的面孔。每次试验都会出现两张面孔,其中一张表达目标情绪,另一张表达干扰情绪。与对照组相比,高特质焦虑参与者的反应时间(注视指示情绪的时间)较慢,无论情绪背景如何。此外,我们还发现焦虑组在有中性和恐惧分心物的情况下,对快乐面孔(积极情境)的反应较慢。因此,焦虑时的认知控制可能会受到干扰,因为焦虑者处理(搜索)快乐面孔的时间更长,这可能是因为注意力资源被中性和恐惧分心物所吸引。在一项简单的反应时间任务中并没有观察到这些差异,这表明造成这些差异的原因是注意偏差,而不是对低级面部特征的不同处理。
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
Trends in Psychology
Trends in Psychology Psychology-Psychology (all)
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
121
审稿时长
48 weeks
期刊介绍: Trends in Psychology is a quarterly publication of the Brazilian Society of Psychology. It is intended to disseminate original scientific work in all fields of psychology, such as empirical, historical, theoretical and conceptual studies, as well as reviews of literature.
期刊最新文献
Assessment of Vocational Interests by Areas of Psychology: Relations with the Big Five and RIASEC LGBTQIA + Individuals in the Sports Context: A Systematic Literature Review Based on Social Identity Theory Life Satisfaction, Anxiety, Stress, Depression, and Resilience: A Multigroup Latent Class Analysis Impact of Stereotype Threat on Evaluating Female Drivers' Skills Exploring Impediments to Human Flourishing Across the Lifespan in Six African Countries
×
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