Erin MacIntyre , Eleana Pinto , Brendan Mouatt , Michael L. Henry , Christopher Lamb , Felicity A. Braithwaite , Ann Meulders , Tasha R. Stanton
{"title":"威胁对视觉空间感知、承受能力和保护行为的影响:系统回顾与荟萃分析","authors":"Erin MacIntyre , Eleana Pinto , Brendan Mouatt , Michael L. Henry , Christopher Lamb , Felicity A. Braithwaite , Ann Meulders , Tasha R. Stanton","doi":"10.1016/j.cpr.2024.102449","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Perception has been conceptualised as an active and adaptive process, based upon incoming sensory inputs, which are modified by top-down factors such as cognitions. Visuospatial perception is thought to be scaled based on threat, with highly threatening objects or contexts visually inflated to promote escape or avoidance behaviours. This meta-analytical systematic review quantified the effect and evidence quality of threat-evoked visuospatial scaling, as well as how visuospatial scaling relates to affordances (perceived action capabilities) and behavioural avoidance/escape outcomes. Databases and grey literature were systematically searched inclusive to 10/04/24. Studies were assessed with a customised Risk of Bias form and meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model. 12,354 records were identified. Of these, 49 experiments (<em>n</em> = 3027) were included in the review. There was consistent evidence that threat the of height influenced contextual perception (g = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.45, 0.88) and affordances (g = -0.43, 95% CI: -0.84, -0.03). Threatening objects were viewed as larger (g = 0.76, 95% CI: 0.26, 1.26) and as closer (g = 0.30, 95% CI: 0.17, 0.42). Bodily threat (pain) yielded conflicting effects on visuospatial perception/affordances. We conclude that threat may influence visuospatial perception and affordances. However, since behavioural measures were poorly reported, their relationship with visuospatial perception/affordances remains elusive.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48458,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Psychology Review","volume":"112 ","pages":"Article 102449"},"PeriodicalIF":13.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272735824000709/pdfft?md5=bc1e0907192ba2925dae9e0b83a39c30&pid=1-s2.0-S0272735824000709-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The influence of threat on visuospatial perception, affordances, and protective behaviour: A systematic review and meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Erin MacIntyre , Eleana Pinto , Brendan Mouatt , Michael L. Henry , Christopher Lamb , Felicity A. Braithwaite , Ann Meulders , Tasha R. Stanton\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.cpr.2024.102449\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Perception has been conceptualised as an active and adaptive process, based upon incoming sensory inputs, which are modified by top-down factors such as cognitions. Visuospatial perception is thought to be scaled based on threat, with highly threatening objects or contexts visually inflated to promote escape or avoidance behaviours. This meta-analytical systematic review quantified the effect and evidence quality of threat-evoked visuospatial scaling, as well as how visuospatial scaling relates to affordances (perceived action capabilities) and behavioural avoidance/escape outcomes. Databases and grey literature were systematically searched inclusive to 10/04/24. Studies were assessed with a customised Risk of Bias form and meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model. 12,354 records were identified. Of these, 49 experiments (<em>n</em> = 3027) were included in the review. There was consistent evidence that threat the of height influenced contextual perception (g = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.45, 0.88) and affordances (g = -0.43, 95% CI: -0.84, -0.03). Threatening objects were viewed as larger (g = 0.76, 95% CI: 0.26, 1.26) and as closer (g = 0.30, 95% CI: 0.17, 0.42). Bodily threat (pain) yielded conflicting effects on visuospatial perception/affordances. We conclude that threat may influence visuospatial perception and affordances. However, since behavioural measures were poorly reported, their relationship with visuospatial perception/affordances remains elusive.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48458,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Psychology Review\",\"volume\":\"112 \",\"pages\":\"Article 102449\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":13.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272735824000709/pdfft?md5=bc1e0907192ba2925dae9e0b83a39c30&pid=1-s2.0-S0272735824000709-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Psychology Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272735824000709\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272735824000709","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
The influence of threat on visuospatial perception, affordances, and protective behaviour: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Perception has been conceptualised as an active and adaptive process, based upon incoming sensory inputs, which are modified by top-down factors such as cognitions. Visuospatial perception is thought to be scaled based on threat, with highly threatening objects or contexts visually inflated to promote escape or avoidance behaviours. This meta-analytical systematic review quantified the effect and evidence quality of threat-evoked visuospatial scaling, as well as how visuospatial scaling relates to affordances (perceived action capabilities) and behavioural avoidance/escape outcomes. Databases and grey literature were systematically searched inclusive to 10/04/24. Studies were assessed with a customised Risk of Bias form and meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model. 12,354 records were identified. Of these, 49 experiments (n = 3027) were included in the review. There was consistent evidence that threat the of height influenced contextual perception (g = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.45, 0.88) and affordances (g = -0.43, 95% CI: -0.84, -0.03). Threatening objects were viewed as larger (g = 0.76, 95% CI: 0.26, 1.26) and as closer (g = 0.30, 95% CI: 0.17, 0.42). Bodily threat (pain) yielded conflicting effects on visuospatial perception/affordances. We conclude that threat may influence visuospatial perception and affordances. However, since behavioural measures were poorly reported, their relationship with visuospatial perception/affordances remains elusive.
期刊介绍:
Clinical Psychology Review serves as a platform for substantial reviews addressing pertinent topics in clinical psychology. Encompassing a spectrum of issues, from psychopathology to behavior therapy, cognition to cognitive therapies, behavioral medicine to community mental health, assessment, and child development, the journal seeks cutting-edge papers that significantly contribute to advancing the science and/or practice of clinical psychology.
While maintaining a primary focus on topics directly related to clinical psychology, the journal occasionally features reviews on psychophysiology, learning therapy, experimental psychopathology, and social psychology, provided they demonstrate a clear connection to research or practice in clinical psychology. Integrative literature reviews and summaries of innovative ongoing clinical research programs find a place within its pages. However, reports on individual research studies and theoretical treatises or clinical guides lacking an empirical base are deemed inappropriate for publication.