H Y Han1, T Gan2, P Li3, Z J Li1, M Guo1, S M Yao1. 1. Beijing Anding Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China. 2. Department of Psychology, Zhejiang Sci-Tech University, Hangzhou, China. 3. Department of Psychiatry, Qiqihaer Medical University, Qiqihaer, Heilongjiang, China.
Abstract
Affective states influence subsequent attention allocation. We evaluated emotional negativity bias modulation by reappraisal in patients with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) relative to normal controls. Event-related potential (ERP) recordings were obtained, and changes in P200 and P300 amplitudes in response to negative or neutral words were noted after decreasing negative emotion or establishing a neutral condition. We found that in GAD patients only, the mean P200 amplitude after negative word presentation was much higher than after the presentation of neutral words. In normal controls, after downregulation of negative emotion, the mean P300 amplitude in response to negative words was much lower than after neutral words, and this was significant in both the left and right regions. In GAD patients, the negative bias remained prominent and was not affected by reappraisal at the early stage. Reappraisal was observed to have a lateralized effect at the late stage.
Affective states influence subsequent attention allocation. We evaluated emotional negativity bias modulation by reappraisal in patients with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) relative to normal controls. Event-related potential (ERP) recordings were obtained, and changes in P200 and P300 amplitudes in response to negative or neutral words were noted after decreasing negative emotion or establishing a neutral condition. We found that in GAD patients only, the mean P200 amplitude after negative word presentation was much higher than after the presentation of neutral words. In normal controls, after downregulation of negative emotion, the mean P300 amplitude in response to negative words was much lower than after neutral words, and this was significant in both the left and right regions. In GAD patients, the negative bias remained prominent and was not affected by reappraisal at the early stage. Reappraisal was observed to have a lateralized effect at the late stage.
Patients with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) are characterized by emotional
hyperarousal, and their negative emotions are more intense than those of most other
people (1). This emotional dysfunction in
patients with GAD can result in attentional bias. Studies have shown that individuals
with GAD experience an attention bias toward threat (2-4), which results in the
hyperarousal of negative emotions. Furthermore, research has indicated that the effects
of cognitive bias in anxious persons may depend on their mood (5). However, it is not known whether attentional bias is modulated
in GAD patients after their mood is improved.According to Gross' emotion regulation theory, the cognitive strategy of reappraisal can
reduce behavioral and subjective signs of disgust and anxiety (6,7). Reappraisal can
successfully up- or downregulate negative emotions (8-10). Blair et al. (11) found that during emotional regulation testing,
GAD patients exhibited reduced blood oxygen level-dependent responses in areas of the
brain implicated in top-down attentional control. This suggests that reappraisal may
change emotion. If GAD patients utilize reappraisal to downregulate negative emotions,
the amount of attention they allocate to negative stimuli probably would be reduced.Event-related potential (ERP) waveforms reflect the brain's response to specific events
and are very useful for assessing attentional bias to emotional stimuli. They have been
extensively applied to the study of attention to emotional stimuli such as fear (12), anger (13), and emotion-word Stroop effect (14), and have been effective in other psychological and cognitive studies
(15,16). Attention bias is preferentially sustained by affective significance
stimuli (17), which can be recorded by P200 and
P300 registered in the frontal and parietal areas of the brain. For example, the
positive peak occurring ∼200 ms after initiation of a stimulus (P200) is particularly
involved in negative attentional bias, and amplitudes at this peak are higher in
response to negative stimuli than to positive ones (18). The P300 of the ERP has also been used extensively to study emotional
processing and attentional bias. Both pleasant and unpleasant words can evoke a higher
P300 than neutral words, indicating that greater attention resources are allocated to
emotive materials (19). In healthy participants,
P300 amplitudes decreased with increasing unpleasant emotions by reappraisal (10,20,21). Thus, regulating negative emotions by
reappraisal, attention allocation changes are reflected by the P300 amplitude. However,
no research has focused on changes in P200 and P300 amplitudes in patients with GAD when
unpleasant emotions are decreased.For the present study, we hypothesized that because GAD patients have less ability to
regulate emotion, and because that can influence subsequent attention allocation, P200
and P300 amplitudes should be higher in GAD patients than normal controls after
decreasing negative emotion by reappraisal. This study will help to understand the
character of attentional bias modulation in patients with GAD at the early and late
stages of the reappraisal process.
Material and Methods
Participants
The Institutional Review Board of Beijing Anding Hospital approved this study. All
GAD patients were recruited at the Beijing Anding Hospital. Diagnoses were
established according to the Anxiety Disorders Interview Schedule for DSM-IV:
Lifetime version (22). Exclusion criteria were
the presence of a diagnosis other than GAD as a primary disorder on axis I, or any
other diagnosed problems on axes II, III, or IV of the DSM-IV. GAD patients currently
receiving any form of behavioral, cognitive, or medication treatments were excluded.
None of the control patients had been diagnosed with psychiatric or neurological
disease.Sixteen GAD patients (8 men, 8 women with a mean age of 31.56±7.53 years) were
recruited. The total Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale score was 20.94±5.50, and the mean
education level was 15.00±2.93 years. Seventeen healthy control participants (8 men,
9 women) were recruited following a request for individuals between 18 and 50 years
of age. The mean age of this group was 32.75±8.36 years, and there were no
differences between the GAD patients and controls in age or education level
(P>0.05 for both). Prior to testing, every participant was familiarized with the
laboratory setting, and the experiment was explained to each in general terms. All
participants signed an informed consent form.
Stimuli
All subjects in the GAD patient and control groups were given two types of stimuli,
pictures and words. A Likert scale, ranging from 1 to 9, was used to evaluate both
valence and arousal of the pictures and words. The pictures consisted of 80
unpleasant images (mean±SD, valence=2.68±0.53; arousal=5.90±0.59) and 80 neutral
images (valence=5.13±0.28; arousal=4.18±0.77) drawn from the Chinese affective
picture system (23). Word stimuli (each word
including 2 characters) consisted of 80 negative (valence=2.80±0.29;
arousal=5.82±0.47) and 80 neutral words (valence=5.08±0.16; arousal=4.40±0.82) drawn
from the Chinese affective words system (24).
Each picture and word was presented only once in each block. The 160 trial pictures
and words were divided into four blocks for use in the investigation.The 40 trials in each block were presented in four sets of 10 image-word
combinations, with 10 trials for each condition. Each set consisted of one of 4
possible conditions (below), while each image-word combination was presented randomly
(10). In each trial, the subject was first
exposed to an image (neutral or negative), and then a word (neutral or negative). The
possible combinations (i.e., conditions) were designated Sneutral/neutral,
Sneutral/negative, Snegative/neutral, and
Snegative/negative, respectively. The initial exposure to a neutral or
unpleasant image meant that the subject's response to the following word would occur
after either a neutral condition had been established, or a negative emotion had been
downregulated, respectively.
Emotion regulation (ER) instructions
The reappraisal emotion regulation strategy of suppressing emotion (10) was employed. Participants were instructed to
imagine that the situation depicted in the picture was not real, but rather that it
was part of a movie, or just a picture. By thinking in this way, negative emotions in
response to a picture are decreased. Participants were also instructed to regulate
their emotions towards both negative pictures and neutral pictures by reappraisal of
the pictures. All of the participants were given ER instructions for 20-30 min until
they understood them.
Procedure
The task was based on work previously described by Deveney and Pizzagalli (10). During the task, participants were
instructed to passively view the picture during the first 5 s, during which no
suppression by reappraisal was required. After the initial 5 s, an automated voice
instructing “emotional regulation” in Chinese was given through a set of speakers
above the monitor. This voice instructed participants to suppress their emotional
experience using the reappraisal ER strategy detailed above. The ER phase lasted for
5 s, and at the same time the picture disappeared from the screen. Following a 600-ms
delay a Chinese word appeared in the center of the screen. The participants were
asked to identify whether the word was negative (by pressing ‘1’ on the keyboard) or
neutral (pressing ‘2’ on the keyboard) and ERPs were recorded simultaneously. The
words disappeared when the participants pressed the button. The presentation of the
next trial followed the response to the word with an interval of 4 s (Figure 1).
Figure 1
Reappraisal task procedure. Participants viewed the pictures for 5 s, and
then they reappraised them. After a 5-s regulation period and a short delay, a
negative or neutral word appeared. Participants were asked to press response
buttons to indicate whether the word was negative or neutral. Reaction time,
P200, and P300 were measured in response to the negative and neutral
words.
Initially, five trials were presented randomly for the purpose of practice, after
which participants progressed through the four blocks in order. Upon completion of
each block, the participants were given a rest break and instructed to breathe
lightly, relax, and close their eyes. All the participants used their right hands to
make each word judgment by pressing 1 for the negative words and 2 for the neutral
words.After listening to the instructions, participants were given the chance to ask
questions and were provided with additional examples, until the experimenter felt
that each of them fully understood the emotion regulation instructions. As an
additional manipulation check, the experimenter reviewed the participants' responses
to the questionnaire after the experiment to determine whether they understood the
instructions and routinely used the reappraisal strategy (25).
ERP recording and data analysis
Electroencephalograms (EEGs) were recorded from 64 scalp sites using electrodes
mounted on an elastic cap (Brain Product, GmbH, Germany), with an online reference to
the left mastoid. The horizontal electro-oculogram (HEOG) was recorded using two
electrodes placed lateral to the right and left eyes. The vertical electro-oculogram
(VEOG) was recorded with electrodes placed above and below the right eye. All
interelectrode impedances were maintained below 5 kΩ. The EEG and electro-oculogram
(EOG) were amplified using a 0.01-100 Hz band-pass filter and continuously sampled at
500 Hz in each channel. For off-line analysis, all EEG signals were rereferenced to
the average of the left and right mastoids. A linear interpolation was used to
correct for corrupted channels (26). The EEG
data were low-pass-filtered below 50 Hz (24 dB/oct) and were corrected for eye
movements or blinks with the Gratton and Coles' method as implemented in the Brain
Vision analysis software (Brain Product, GmbH). Trials containing EEG sweeps with
amplitudes exceeding ±100 mV were excluded. In each condition, no subject had more
than 10 unacceptable trials.The ERP waveforms were time-locked to the onset of the word stimulus; the average
epoch was 1800 ms, including a 200 ms pre-stimulus baseline. We recorded the
amplitudes of P200 and P300 and calculated their mean values. Electrode sites were
chosen based on previous studies (27) and the
visual inspection of the ERP grand average waveforms. For P200, mean amplitudes from
160 to 230 ms were recorded from electrodes placed at F1, F3, F5 (right anterior),
and F2, F4, F6 (left anterior). For P300, mean amplitudes from 280 to 380 ms were
analyzed and 24 electrodes placed anterior to posterior for left (F1, F3, F5, FC1,
FC3, FC5, CP1, CP3, CP5, P1, P3, P5) and right (F2, F4, F6, FC2, FC4, FC6, CP2, CP4,
CP6, P2, P4, P6) regions: left and right were selected for this component.The following within-subject factors were used in the analysis: region (left or
right), picture valence (negative or neutral), and word valence (negative or
neutral). Repeated analyses of variance (ANOVA) were performed with the factors group
(GAD or control), picture valence (positive or negative), and word valence.
Greenhouse-Geisser corrections were adopted wherever appropriate.Reaction time data were used for data analysis. These were averaged across conditions
for each participant and submitted to separate (GAD, control)×2, (negative, neutral
pictures)×2, (negative, neutral words) ANOVAs. SPSS 16.0 was used for all statistical
analyses (IBM, USA). P<0.05 was considered to be significant.
Results
The reaction times of the GAD patients and normal controls differed significantly, as
indicated by the interaction of word valence×group [F (1, 31)=4.731, P=0.037,
η2=0.132], and post hoc Neuman-Keuls comparisons
indicated that GAD patients responded more slowly to neutral words than did the normal
controls (P=0.030; Figure 2, Table 1).
Figure 2
Comparison of reaction time under Snegative/negative,
Snegative/neutral, Sneutral/negative, and
Sneutral/neutral conditions between patients with generalized
anxiety disorder (GAD) and normal controls. *P<0.05, post hoc
Neuman-Keuls comparisons test.
For the mean anterior P200 amplitude, picture and word valence were identified as the
main effectors (F (1, 31)=15.98, P=0.000, η2=0.340) and (F (1, 31)=6.95,
P=0.013, η2=0.183), respectively. Most important, the interaction of word
valence×group was significant (F (1, 31)=4.48, P=0.038, η2=0.131). In GAD
patients only, the mean P200 amplitudes in response to negative words were significantly
higher than the mean P200 amplitudes in response to neutral words (P=0.002; Figure 3, Table
2). The P200 amplitude was not significantly affected by any other stimulus or
interaction of stimuli.
Figure 3
Event-related potentials recorded for patients with generalized anxiety
disorder (GAD) and normal controls under Snegative/negative,
Snegative/neutral, Sneutral/negative and
Sneutral/neutral conditions, showing P200 amplitude at the site of
F3 and F4.
For the mean P300 amplitude, word valence was revealed as a significant effect. The mean
P300 amplitudes in response to negative words were higher than the mean P300 amplitudes
in response to neutral words (F (1, 31)=8.39, P=0.007, η2=0.213). In
addition, the interaction of picture valence×word valence (F (1, 31)=7.47, P=0.010,
η2=0.194) and region×picture valence×word valence×group (F (1, 31)=5.41,
P=0.027, η2=0.116) significantly affected the mean P300.
Post-hoc comparisons indicated that for the GAD patient group, there
was a mean P300 amplitude response of
Snegative/negativepatient group,
there was a higher mean P300 amplitude in response to negative words than to neutral
words after neutral pictures
(Sneutral/negative>Sneutral/neutral; P=0.002 and 0.001),
which was not seen in the normal group. There was no significant difference in the
conditions Snegative/neutral and Sneutral/neutral (P>0.05)
between the groups (Figure 4, Table 3).
Figure 4
Event-related potentials recorded for patients with generalized anxiety
disorder (GAD) and normal controls under Snegative/negative,
Snegative/neutral, Sneutral/negative and
Sneutral/neutral conditions, showing P300 amplitude at the site of
P5 and P6.
Discussion
GAD patients experience an attention bias toward threat that results in the hyperarousal
of negative emotions. We investigated whether this bias, after decreasing negative
emotion through conscious reappraisal, would be reflected by differences in P200 and
P300 amplitudes relative to normal controls. We reasoned that such differentials would
exist, and our data bear this out. After training in ER, the subjects were presented
with either a neutral or unpleasant image for 5 s and instructed to reappraise and
downregulate negative emotions. After 5 s of exposure to the image and 5 s of
reappraisal, the image was replaced with a neutral or negative word after a 600-ms
delay. Participants judged whether the word was negative or neutral, ERPs (P200 and
P300) were recorded, and their choice was timed. Patients with GAD spent more time than
normal controls judging neutral information. Furthermore, only in the GAD group was the
P200 amplitude in response to negative words higher than the P200 amplitude in response
to neutral words. This suggests that the greater sensitivity to negative stimuli in GAD
patients than in the normal controls was reflected by the higher P200 amplitude. In both
groups, after downregulation of negative emotion, the mean P300 amplitude was much lower
in response to negative than to neutral words. However, in GAD patients, this response
was significant only on the right, whereas in normal controls the response was
bilateral.The results of our study suggested that the reaction time was not affected by a prior
reappraisal process in either GAD patients or normal controls. This result is consistent
with Deveney and Pizzagalli's study (10) in which
behavioral performance was not changed by reappraisal regulation. Furthermore, in the
present study, patients with GAD spent more time than normal controls judging neutral
information.In a modified version of the Go/No go task, it was reported that extended reaction times
to Go cues (letter “M”) were longer during the mental processing of negative or neutral
contexts than during positive contexts (28).
Therefore in our study, the behavioral performance result may indicate that GAD patients
are less able to deal with neutral stimuli than are normal individuals. Slower reactions
to neutral stimuli by GAD patients may reflect cognitive process deficits such as
greater intolerance of uncertainty (29). If
intolerance of uncertainty was moderated by emotion regulation, the patients with GAD
reacted more quickly to subsequent neutral stimuli.In the present study, we did not find that emotional regulation had any effect on P200
amplitude, in either GAD patients or normal controls. This suggests that the early stage
of emotional word processing was not influenced by emotion regulation. This result is
consistent with Huang and Luo's study (30) that
the P200 amplitude reflecting negative emotion was significantly higher than that for
positive emotion, indicating that attention negativity bias occurs very early in emotion
perception. In our study, the P200 amplitude in response to negative words was higher
than the P200 amplitude in response to neutral words in GAD patients, whether or not
negative emotions were first downregulated, but this effect was not seen in normal
controls. This is particularly significant, as it suggests that this is a characteristic
response to negative stimulus in GAD, and these patients' negative bias could not change
at the early stage of perception after reappraisal. There has been research showing that
biased attention might be inherent in anxiety disorder (31) and preconscious biases of attention toward a negative stimulus
heightened vulnerability to anxiety (32). Our
observations in this study indicate that downregulating negative emotion by reappraisal
in GAD patients will not affect the early stage of attention to negative
information.For GAD patients, the P300 amplitudes were higher in response to
Sneutral/negative trials than they were to the Sneutral/neutral
trials, but in the normal controls the P300 amplitudes were not significantly different.
This indicated that only in the GAD group was the P300 amplitude in response to negative
words significantly higher than to neutral words under neutral conditions. This is
consistent with a previous study showing that in GAD patients, emotional words could
evoke more positive P300 amplitudes than neutral words (19). Our results are also consistent with a previous report that GAD patients
showed more emotion negativity bias than did normal controls (33).However, our results are inconsistent with the findings of Deveny and Pizzagalli (10). In their study, the P300 amplitudes of normal
individuals in response to a decreasing unpleasant condition were similar to those in
response to a neutral condition. In our study, for both GAD patients and controls, after
negative emotions were downregulated the P300 amplitudes in response to negative words
were lower than for the neutral condition
(Snegative/negativepatients. Specifically, this effect
on the P300 amplitude was significant only at the right region for GAD patients, but was
significant at both hemispheres for the control group. The lack of interaction effect at
the left region may reveal a weakness in late-stage emotion processing in GAD patients.
Patients with GAD have difficulties in modulating negative emotions and using fixed
cognitive control strategies to avoid some experiences (34). Our results indicated that these difficulties in GAD patients could be
reflected by the P300.
In GAD patients, the right hemisphere downregulation of negative emotion caused a
subsequent lowering of P300 amplitude in response to negative words, compared with the
neutral condition. Research found that anxiety-prone individuals engage prefrontal
cortical systems more when downregulating emotions. Compared to controls, anxious
participants displayed greater left dorsolateral prefrontal cortical activity during
downregulation of emotion (35). Thus, there is a
lateralized effect when downregulating emotions in anxiety-prone persons. Our current
findings are in agreement with this. However, in GAD patients, this effect of negative
words after downregulation is significant only on the right at the late stage
(P300).The current study could be considered limited by the relatively small sample size, and
further studies are needed to corroborate and build upon these findings. In addition,
the lack of physiological recordings was a limitation, and in future studies these will
be added during reappraisal.In summary, in GAD patients after downregulation of negative emotion by reappraisal, the
modulation of emotional negativity bias followed a temporal course. At the early stage,
the negative bias remained prominent and was not affected by reappraisal. However, at
the late stage the reappraisal was observed to have a lateralized effect. This may
constitute an inherent phenotype of GAD patients, in that cognitive resource allocation
is lateralized and response is delayed.
Authors: Liselotte Gootjes; Leonora C Coppens; Rolf A Zwaan; Ingmar H A Franken; Jan W Van Strien Journal: Int J Psychophysiol Date: 2010-12-13 Impact factor: 2.997
Authors: Kevin N Ochsner; Rebecca D Ray; Jeffrey C Cooper; Elaine R Robertson; Sita Chopra; John D E Gabrieli; James J Gross Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2004-10 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Jennifer L Stewart; Rebecca Levin Silton; Sarah M Sass; Joscelyn E Fisher; J Christopher Edgar; Wendy Heller; Gregory A Miller Journal: Int J Psychophysiol Date: 2010-01-25 Impact factor: 2.997
Authors: Nuria Mallorquí-Bagué; María Lozano-Madrid; Giulia Testa; Cristina Vintró-Alcaraz; Isabel Sánchez; Nadine Riesco; José César Perales; Juan Francisco Navas; Ignacio Martínez-Zalacaín; Alberto Megías; Roser Granero; Misericordia Veciana De Las Heras; Rayane Chami; Susana Jiménez-Murcia; José Antonio Fernández-Formoso; Janet Treasure; Fernando Fernández-Aranda Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2020-03-31 Impact factor: 4.241