A Zinchenko1, M M Al-Amin2, M M Alam3, W Mahmud3, N Kabir3, H M Reza3, T H J Burne4. 1. Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Stephanstraße 1A, 04103 Leipzig, Germany; Department of General and Experimental Psychology, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich, Germany. 2. Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, North South University, Bashundhara, Dhaka, Bangladesh; Queensland Brain Institute, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. 3. Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, North South University, Bashundhara, Dhaka, Bangladesh. 4. Queensland Brain Institute, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia; Queensland Centre for Mental Health Research, The Park Centre for Mental Health, Richlands, QLD 4077, Australia. Electronic address: t.burne@uq.edu.au.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Attentional bias to affective information and reduced cognitive control may maintain the symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and impair cognitive functioning. However, the role of content specificity of affective stimuli (e.g., trauma-related, emotional trauma-unrelated) in the observed attentional bias and cognitive control is less clear, as this has not been tested simultaneously before. Therefore, we examined the content specificity of attentional bias to threat in PTSD. METHODS: PTSD participants (survivors of a multistory factory collapse, n=30) and matched controls (n=30) performed an Eriksen Flanker task. They identified the direction of a centrally presented target arrow, which was flanked by several task-irrelevant distractor arrows pointed to the same (congruent) or opposite direction (incongruent). Additionally, participants were presented with a picture of a face (neutral, emotional) or building (neutral=normal, emotional=collapsed multistory factory) as a task-irrelevant background image. RESULTS: We found that PTSD participants produced overall larger conflict effects and longer reaction times (RT) to emotional than to neutral stimuli relative to their healthy counterparts. Moreover, PTSD, but not healthy participants showed a stimulus specific dissociation in processing emotional stimuli. Emotional faces elicited longer RTs compared to neutral faces, while emotional buildings elicited faster responses, compared to neutral buildings. CONCLUSIONS: PTSD patients show a content-sensitive attentional bias to emotional information and impaired cognitive control.
BACKGROUND: Attentional bias to affective information and reduced cognitive control may maintain the symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and impair cognitive functioning. However, the role of content specificity of affective stimuli (e.g., trauma-related, emotional trauma-unrelated) in the observed attentional bias and cognitive control is less clear, as this has not been tested simultaneously before. Therefore, we examined the content specificity of attentional bias to threat in PTSD. METHODS:PTSDparticipants (survivors of a multistory factory collapse, n=30) and matched controls (n=30) performed an Eriksen Flanker task. They identified the direction of a centrally presented target arrow, which was flanked by several task-irrelevant distractor arrows pointed to the same (congruent) or opposite direction (incongruent). Additionally, participants were presented with a picture of a face (neutral, emotional) or building (neutral=normal, emotional=collapsed multistory factory) as a task-irrelevant background image. RESULTS: We found that PTSDparticipants produced overall larger conflict effects and longer reaction times (RT) to emotional than to neutral stimuli relative to their healthy counterparts. Moreover, PTSD, but not healthy participants showed a stimulus specific dissociation in processing emotional stimuli. Emotional faces elicited longer RTs compared to neutral faces, while emotional buildings elicited faster responses, compared to neutral buildings. CONCLUSIONS:PTSDpatients show a content-sensitive attentional bias to emotional information and impaired cognitive control.
Authors: Vanessa M Brown; Lusha Zhu; John M Wang; B Christopher Frueh; Brooks King-Casas; Pearl H Chiu Journal: Elife Date: 2018-01-09 Impact factor: 8.140
Authors: Brian D Kangas; Ann M Iturra-Mena; Mykel A Robble; Oanh T Luc; David Potter; Stefanie Nickels; Jack Bergman; William A Carlezon; Diego A Pizzagalli Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-06-03 Impact factor: 4.996