Jump to content

User:Mfs2162/Affective neuroscience: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Mfs2162 (talk | contribs)
62 edits
→Cognitive neuroscience tasks in affective neuroscience research: simplified and clarified language emotion go/no-go
Mfs2162 (talk | contribs)
62 edits
→Emotional Stroop: clarified language
Line 24: Line 24:


=== Emotional Stroop ===
=== Emotional Stroop ===
The emotional Stroop task, an adaptation to the original [[Stroop effect|Stroop]], measures [[attentional bias]] to emotional stimuli.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Stroop |first1=J.R. |year=1935 |title=Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions |journal=Journal of Experimental Psychology |volume=18 |issue=6 |pages=643–662 |doi=10.1037/h0054651 |hdl-access=free |hdl=11858/00-001M-0000-002C-5ADB-7}}</ref><ref name="Epp, A.M. 2012">{{cite journal |last1=Epp |first1=A.M. |last2=Dobson |first2=K.S. |last3=Dozois |first3=D.J.A. |last4=Frewen |first4=P.A. |year=2012 |title=A systematic meta-analysis of the stroop task in depression |journal=Clinical Psychology Review |volume=32 |issue=4 |pages=316–328 |doi=10.1016/j.cpr.2012.02.005 |pmid=22459792}}</ref> Participants must name the ink color of presented words while ignoring the words' meanings.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Pratto |first1=F. |last2=John |first2=O. P. |year=1991 |title=Automatic vigilance: The attention grabbing power of negative social information |journal=Journal of Personality & Social Psychology |volume=61 |issue=3 |pages=380–391 |doi=10.1037/0022-3514.61.3.380 |pmid=1941510}}</ref> In general, participants have more difficulty detaching attention from affectively valenced words, than neutral words.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Wentura |first1=D. |last2=Rothermund |first2=K. |last3=Bak |first3=P. |year=2000 |title=Automatic vigilance: The attention-grabbing power of approach and avoidance-related social information |journal=Journal of Personality and Social Psychology |volume=78 |issue=6 |pages=1024–1037 |doi=10.1037/0022-3514.78.6.1024 |pmid=10870906}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Williams |first1=J.M. |last2=Broadbent |first2=K. |year=1986 |title=Distraction by emotional stimuli: use of a Stroop task with suicide attempters |journal=British Journal of Clinical Psychology |volume=25 |issue=2 |pages=101–110 |doi=10.1111/j.2044-8260.1986.tb00678.x |pmid=3730646}}</ref> This interference from valenced words is measured by the [[Mental chronometry|response latency]] in naming the color of neutral words as compared with emotional words.<ref name="Epp, A.M. 2012" />
Adapted from the [[Stroop effect|Stroop]], the emotional Stroop test measures how much attention you pay to emotional stimuli.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Stroop |first1=J.R. |year=1935 |title=Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions |journal=Journal of Experimental Psychology |volume=18 |issue=6 |pages=643–662 |doi=10.1037/h0054651 |hdl-access=free |hdl=11858/00-001M-0000-002C-5ADB-7}}</ref><ref name="Epp, A.M. 2012">{{cite journal |last1=Epp |first1=A.M. |last2=Dobson |first2=K.S. |last3=Dozois |first3=D.J.A. |last4=Frewen |first4=P.A. |year=2012 |title=A systematic meta-analysis of the stroop task in depression |journal=Clinical Psychology Review |volume=32 |issue=4 |pages=316–328 |doi=10.1016/j.cpr.2012.02.005 |pmid=22459792}}</ref> In this task, participants are instructed to name the ink color of words while ignoring their meanings.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Pratto |first1=F. |last2=John |first2=O. P. |year=1991 |title=Automatic vigilance: The attention grabbing power of negative social information |journal=Journal of Personality & Social Psychology |volume=61 |issue=3 |pages=380–391 |doi=10.1037/0022-3514.61.3.380 |pmid=1941510}}</ref> Generally, people have trouble detaching their attention from words with an affective meaning compared with neutral words.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Wentura |first1=D. |last2=Rothermund |first2=K. |last3=Bak |first3=P. |year=2000 |title=Automatic vigilance: The attention-grabbing power of approach and avoidance-related social information |journal=Journal of Personality and Social Psychology |volume=78 |issue=6 |pages=1024–1037 |doi=10.1037/0022-3514.78.6.1024 |pmid=10870906}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Williams |first1=J.M. |last2=Broadbent |first2=K. |year=1986 |title=Distraction by emotional stimuli: use of a Stroop task with suicide attempters |journal=British Journal of Clinical Psychology |volume=25 |issue=2 |pages=101–110 |doi=10.1111/j.2044-8260.1986.tb00678.x |pmid=3730646}}</ref> It has been demonstrated in several studies that naming the color of neutral words results in a quicker response.<ref name="Epp, A.M. 2012" />


This task has been often used to test [[Cocktail party effect|selective attention]] to threatening and other negatively valenced stimuli, most often in relation to psychopathology.<ref name="Williams, M.G. 1996">{{cite journal |last1=Williams |first1=M.G. |last2=Matthews |first2=A. |last3=MacLeod |first3=C. |year=1996 |title=The emotional stroop task and psychopathology |journal=Psychological Bulletin |volume=120 |issue=1 |pages=3–24 |doi=10.1037/0033-2909.120.1.3 |pmid=8711015}}</ref> Disorder-specific attentional biases have been found for a variety of mental disorders.<ref name="Williams, M.G. 1996" /><ref>Gotlib, I.H., Roberts, J.E., & Gilboa, E. (1996). Cognitive interference in depression. in I.G. Sarason, G.R. Pierce, & B.R. Sarason (Eds.), Cognitive interference: Theories, methods, and findings, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc., Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 347–377.</ref> For example, participants with spider [[phobia]] show a bias to spider-related words but not other negatively valenced words.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Watts |first1=E N. |last2=McKenna |first2=E P. |last3=Sharrock |first3=R. |last4=Trezise |first4=L. |year=1986 |title=Colour naming of phobia-related words |journal=British Journal of Psychology |volume=77 |pages=97–108 |doi=10.1111/j.2044-8295.1986.tb01985.x |pmid=2869817}}</ref> Similar findings have been attributed to threat words related to other anxiety disorders.<ref name="Williams, M.G. 1996" /> However, other studies have questioned these findings. In fact, anxious participants in some studies show the Stroop interference effect for both negative and positive words, when the words are matched for emotionality.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Martin |first1=M. |last2=Williams |first2=R. M. |last3=Clark |first3=D. M. |year=1991 |title=Does anxiety lead to selective processing of threat-related information? |journal=Behaviour Research and Therapy |volume=29 |issue=2 |pages=147–160 |doi=10.1016/0005-7967(91)90043-3 |pmid=2021377}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Mogg |first1=K. |last2=Mathews |first2=A. M. |last3=Weinman |first3=J. |year=1989 |title=Selective processing of threat cues in anxiety states: A replication |journal=Behaviour Research and Therapy |volume=27 |issue=4 |pages=317–323 |doi=10.1016/0005-7967(89)90001-6 |pmid=2775141}}</ref> This means that the specificity effects for various disorders may be largely attributable to the semantic relation of the words to the concerns of the disorder, rather than their emotionality.<ref name="Williams, M.G. 1996" />
Selective attention to negative or threatening stimuli, which are often related to psychological disorders, is commonly tested with this task.<ref name="Williams, M.G. 1996">{{cite journal |last1=Williams |first1=M.G. |last2=Matthews |first2=A. |last3=MacLeod |first3=C. |year=1996 |title=The emotional stroop task and psychopathology |journal=Psychological Bulletin |volume=120 |issue=1 |pages=3–24 |doi=10.1037/0033-2909.120.1.3 |pmid=8711015}}</ref> DDifferent mental disorders have been associated with specific attentional biases.<ref name="Williams, M.G. 1996" /><ref>Gotlib, I.H., Roberts, J.E., & Gilboa, E. (1996). Cognitive interference in depression. in I.G. Sarason, G.R. Pierce, & B.R. Sarason (Eds.), Cognitive interference: Theories, methods, and findings, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc., Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 347–377.</ref> FParticipants with spider phobia, for example, tend to be more inclined to use spider-related words than negatively charged words.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Watts |first1=E N. |last2=McKenna |first2=E P. |last3=Sharrock |first3=R. |last4=Trezise |first4=L. |year=1986 |title=Colour naming of phobia-related words |journal=British Journal of Psychology |volume=77 |pages=97–108 |doi=10.1111/j.2044-8295.1986.tb01985.x |pmid=2869817}}</ref> Similar findings have been found for threat words related to other anxiety disorders.<ref name="Williams, M.G. 1996" /> Even so, other studies have questioned these conclusions. When the words are matched for emotionality, anxious participants in some studies show the Stroop interference effect for both negative and positive words.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Martin |first1=M. |last2=Williams |first2=R. M. |last3=Clark |first3=D. M. |year=1991 |title=Does anxiety lead to selective processing of threat-related information? |journal=Behaviour Research and Therapy |volume=29 |issue=2 |pages=147–160 |doi=10.1016/0005-7967(91)90043-3 |pmid=2021377}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Mogg |first1=K. |last2=Mathews |first2=A. M. |last3=Weinman |first3=J. |year=1989 |title=Selective processing of threat cues in anxiety states: A replication |journal=Behaviour Research and Therapy |volume=27 |issue=4 |pages=317–323 |doi=10.1016/0005-7967(89)90001-6 |pmid=2775141}}</ref> In other words, the specificity effects of words for various disorders may be primarily due to their conceptual relation to the disorder's concerns rather than their emotionality.<ref name="Williams, M.G. 1996" />


=== Ekman 60 faces task ===
=== Ekman 60 faces task ===

Revision as of 04:30, 7 December 2022

Article Draft

Lead

Affective neuroscience is the study of the how the brain processes emotions. This field combines neuroscience with the psychological study of personality, emotion, and mood[1]. The basis of emotions and what emotions are remains an issue of debate within the field of affective neuroscience[2].

The term "affective neuroscience" was coined by neuroscientist Jaak Panksepp, at a time when cognitive neuroscience focused on parts of psychology that did not include emotion, such as attention or memory[3].

Article body

Cognitive neuroscience

While emotions are integral to thought processes, cognition has been investigated without emotion until the late 1990s, focusing instead on non-emotional processes such as memory, attention, perception, problem solving, and mental imagery.[4] Cognitive neuroscience and affective neuroscience have emerged as separate fields for studying the neural basis of non-emotional and emotional processes. Despite the fact that fields are classified according to how the brain processes cognition and emotion, the neural and mental mechanisms behind emotional and non-emotional processes often overlap.[5]

Cognitive neuroscience tasks in affective neuroscience research

Emotion go/no-go

Emotion go/no-go tasks are used to study behavioral inhibition, especially how it is influenced by emotion.[6] A "go" cue tells the participant to respond rapidly, but a "no-go" cue tells them to withhold a response. Because the "go" cue occurs more frequently, it can be used to measure how well a subject suppresses a response under different emotional conditions.[7]

This task is often used in combination with neuroimaging in healthy individuals and patients with affective disorders to identify relevant brain functions associated with emotional regulation.[6][8][9] Several studies, including go/no-go studies, suggest that sections of the prefrontal cortex are involved in controlling emotional responses to stimuli during inhibition.[10]

Emotional Stroop

Adapted from the Stroop, the emotional Stroop test measures how much attention you pay to emotional stimuli.[11][12] In this task, participants are instructed to name the ink color of words while ignoring their meanings.[13] Generally, people have trouble detaching their attention from words with an affective meaning compared with neutral words.[14][15] It has been demonstrated in several studies that naming the color of neutral words results in a quicker response.[12]

Selective attention to negative or threatening stimuli, which are often related to psychological disorders, is commonly tested with this task.[16] DDifferent mental disorders have been associated with specific attentional biases.[16][17] FParticipants with spider phobia, for example, tend to be more inclined to use spider-related words than negatively charged words.[18] Similar findings have been found for threat words related to other anxiety disorders.[16] Even so, other studies have questioned these conclusions. When the words are matched for emotionality, anxious participants in some studies show the Stroop interference effect for both negative and positive words.[19][20] In other words, the specificity effects of words for various disorders may be primarily due to their conceptual relation to the disorder's concerns rather than their emotionality.[16]

Ekman 60 faces task

The Ekman faces task is used to measure emotion recognition of six basic emotions.[21][22] Black and white photographs of 10 actors (6 male, 4 female) are presented, with each actor displaying each emotion. Participants are usually asked to respond quickly with the name of the displayed emotion. The task is a common tool to study deficits in emotion regulation in patients with dementia, Parkinson's, and other cognitively degenerative disorders.[23] The task has been used to analyze recognition errors in disorders such as borderline personality disorder, schizophrenia, and bipolar disorder.[24][25][26]

Dot probe (emotion)

The emotional dot-probe paradigm is a task used to assess selective visual attention to and failure to detach attention from affective stimuli.[27][28] The paradigm begins with a fixation cross at the center of a screen. An emotional stimulus and a neutral stimulus appear side by side, after which a dot appears behind either the neutral stimulus (incongruent condition) or the affective stimulus (congruent condition). Participants are asked to indicate when they see this dot, and response latency is measured. Dots that appear on the same side of the screen as the image the participant was looking at will be identified more quickly. Thus, it is possible to discern which object the participant was attending to by subtracting the reaction time to respond to congruent versus incongruent trials.[27]

The best documented research with the dot probe paradigm involves attention to threat related stimuli, such as fearful faces, in individuals with anxiety disorders. Anxious individuals tend to respond more quickly to congruent trials, which may indicate vigilance to threat and/or failure to detach attention from threatening stimuli.[27][29] A specificity effect of attention has also been noted, with individuals attending selectively to threats related to their particular disorder. For example, those with social phobia selectively attend to social threats but not physical threats.[30] However, this specificity may be even more nuanced. Participants with obsessive-compulsive disorder symptoms initially show attentional bias to compulsive threat, but this bias is attenuated in later trials due to habituation to the threat stimuli.[31]

Fear potentiated startle

Fear-potentiated startle (FPS) has been utilized as a psychophysiological index of fear reaction in both animals and humans.[32] FPS is most often assessed through the magnitude of the eyeblink startle reflex, which can be measured by electromyography.[33] This eyeblink reflex is an automatic defensive reaction to an abrupt elicitor, making it an objective indicator of fear.[34] Typical FPS paradigms involve bursts of noise or abrupt flashes of light transmitted while an individual attends to a set of stimuli.[34] Startle reflexes have been shown to be modulated by emotion. For example, healthy participants tend to show enhanced startle responses while viewing negatively valenced images and attenuated startle while viewing positively valenced images, as compared with neutral images.[35][36]

The startle response to a particular stimulus is greater under conditions of threat.[37] A common example given to indicate this phenomenon is that one's startle response to a flash of light will be greater when walking in a dangerous neighborhood at night than it would under safer conditions. In laboratory studies, the threat of receiving shock is enough to potentiate startle, even without any actual shock.[38]

Fear potentiated startle paradigms are often used to study fear learning and extinction in individuals with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and other anxiety disorders.[39][40][41] In fear conditioning studies, an initially neutral stimulus is repeatedly paired with an aversive one, borrowing from classical conditioning.[42] FPS studies have demonstrated that PTSD patients have enhanced startle responses during both danger cues and neutral/safety cues as compared with healthy participants.[42][43]


References

  1. ^ Panksepp, Jaak (1990), "A Role for Affective Neuroscience in Understanding Stress: The Case of Separation Distress Circuitry", Psychobiology of Stress, Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, pp. 41–57, ISBN 978-94-010-7390-5, retrieved 2022-11-27
  2. ^ Celeghin, Alessia; Diano, Matteo; Bagnis, Arianna; Viola, Marco; Tamietto, Marco (2017-08-24). "Basic Emotions in Human Neuroscience: Neuroimaging and Beyond". Frontiers in Psychology. 8. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01432. ISSN 1664-1078.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
  3. ^ Panksepp, Jaak (2004). Affective Neuroscience: The Foundations of Human and Animal Emotions (1st ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0195178050.
  4. ^ Cacioppo, J.T.; Gardner, W.L. (1999). "Emotion". Annual Review of Psychology. 50: 191–214. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.50.1.191. PMID 10074678.
  5. ^ Davidson, R.J. (2000). "Cognitive neuroscience needs affective neuroscience (and vice versa)". Brain and Cognition. 42 (1): 89–92. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.487.9015. doi:10.1006/brcg.1999.1170. PMID 10739607. S2CID 22183667.
  6. ^ a b Drevets, W.C.; Raichle, M.E. (1998). "Reciprocal suppression of regional cerebral blood flow during emotional versus higher cognitive processes: Implications for interactions between emotion and cognition". Cognition and Emotion. 12 (3): 353–385. doi:10.1080/026999398379646.
  7. ^ Schulz, K.P.; Fan, J.; Magidina, O.; Marks, D.J.; Hahn, B.; Halperin, J.M. (2007). "Does the emotional go/no-go task really measure behavioral inhibition? Convergence with measures on a non-emotional analog". Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology. 22 (2): 151–160. doi:10.1016/j.acn.2006.12.001. PMC 2562664. PMID 17207962.
  8. ^ Elliott, R.; Ogilvie, A.; Rubinsztein, J.S.; Calderon, G.; Dolan, R.J.; Sahakian, B.J. (2004). "Abnormal ventral frontal response during performance of an affective go/no go task in patients with mania". Biological Psychiatry. 55 (12): 1163–1170. doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2004.03.007. hdl:21.11116/0000-0001-A247-8. PMID 15184035. S2CID 6511699.
  9. ^ Elliott, R.; Rubinsztein, J.S.; Sahakian, B.J.; Dolan, R.J. (2000). "Selective attention to emotional stimuli in a verbal go/no-go task: An fMRI study". Brain Imaging. 11 (8): 1739–1744. doi:10.1097/00001756-200006050-00028. PMID 10852235. S2CID 16872952.
  10. ^ Hare, T.A.; Tottenham, N.; Davidson, M.C.; Glover, G.H.; Casey, B.J. (2005). "Contributions of amygdala and striatal activity in emotion regulation". Biological Psychiatry. 57 (6): 624–632. doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2004.12.038. PMID 15780849. S2CID 17690328.
  11. ^ Stroop, J.R. (1935). "Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions". Journal of Experimental Psychology. 18 (6): 643–662. doi:10.1037/h0054651. hdl:11858/00-001M-0000-002C-5ADB-7.
  12. ^ a b Epp, A.M.; Dobson, K.S.; Dozois, D.J.A.; Frewen, P.A. (2012). "A systematic meta-analysis of the stroop task in depression". Clinical Psychology Review. 32 (4): 316–328. doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2012.02.005. PMID 22459792.
  13. ^ Pratto, F.; John, O. P. (1991). "Automatic vigilance: The attention grabbing power of negative social information". Journal of Personality & Social Psychology. 61 (3): 380–391. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.61.3.380. PMID 1941510.
  14. ^ Wentura, D.; Rothermund, K.; Bak, P. (2000). "Automatic vigilance: The attention-grabbing power of approach and avoidance-related social information". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 78 (6): 1024–1037. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.78.6.1024. PMID 10870906.
  15. ^ Williams, J.M.; Broadbent, K. (1986). "Distraction by emotional stimuli: use of a Stroop task with suicide attempters". British Journal of Clinical Psychology. 25 (2): 101–110. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8260.1986.tb00678.x. PMID 3730646.
  16. ^ a b c d Williams, M.G.; Matthews, A.; MacLeod, C. (1996). "The emotional stroop task and psychopathology". Psychological Bulletin. 120 (1): 3–24. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.120.1.3. PMID 8711015.
  17. ^ Gotlib, I.H., Roberts, J.E., & Gilboa, E. (1996). Cognitive interference in depression. in I.G. Sarason, G.R. Pierce, & B.R. Sarason (Eds.), Cognitive interference: Theories, methods, and findings, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc., Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 347–377.
  18. ^ Watts, E N.; McKenna, E P.; Sharrock, R.; Trezise, L. (1986). "Colour naming of phobia-related words". British Journal of Psychology. 77: 97–108. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8295.1986.tb01985.x. PMID 2869817.
  19. ^ Martin, M.; Williams, R. M.; Clark, D. M. (1991). "Does anxiety lead to selective processing of threat-related information?". Behaviour Research and Therapy. 29 (2): 147–160. doi:10.1016/0005-7967(91)90043-3. PMID 2021377.
  20. ^ Mogg, K.; Mathews, A. M.; Weinman, J. (1989). "Selective processing of threat cues in anxiety states: A replication". Behaviour Research and Therapy. 27 (4): 317–323. doi:10.1016/0005-7967(89)90001-6. PMID 2775141.
  21. ^ Diehl-Schmid, J.; Pohl, C.; Ruprecht, C.; Wagenpfeil, S.; Foerstl, H.; Kurz, A. (2007). "The Ekman 60 faces test as a diagnostic instrument in frontotemporal dementia". Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology. 22 (4): 459–464. doi:10.1016/j.acn.2007.01.024. PMID 17360152.
  22. ^ Ekman, P., & Friesen, W. (1976). Pictures of facial affect. Consulting Psychologists Press: Palo Alto, CA.
  23. ^ Diehl-Schmida, J.; Pohla, C.; Ruprechta, C.; Wagenpfeilb, S.; Foerstla, H.; Kurza, A. (2007). "The Ekman 60 faces test as a diagnostic instrument in frontotemporal dementia". Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology. 22 (4): 459–464. doi:10.1016/j.acn.2007.01.024. PMID 17360152.
  24. ^ Ibarretxe-Bilbao, N.; Junque, C.; Tolosa, E.; Marti, M.; Valldeoriola, F.; Bargalloand, N.; Zareio, M. (2009). "Neuroanatomical correlates of impaired decision-making and facial emotion recognition in early Parkinson's disease". European Journal of Neuroscience. 30 (6): 1162–1171. doi:10.1111/j.1460-9568.2009.06892.x. PMID 19735293. S2CID 413809.
  25. ^ Soeiro-de-Souza, M.G.; Bio, D.S.; David, D.P.; Santos, D.R.; Kerr, D.S.; Moreno, R.A.; Machado-Vieira, Rodrigo; Moreno, Ricardo Albeto (2012). "COMT Met (158) modulates facial emotion recognition in bipolar I disorder mood episodes". Journal of Affective Disorders. 136 (3): 370–376. doi:10.1016/j.jad.2011.11.021. PMID 22222175.
  26. ^ Ebert, A.; Haussleiter, I.S.; Juckel, G.; Brune, M.; Roser, P. (2012). "Impaired facial emotion recognition in a ketamine model of psychosis". Psychiatry Research. 200 (2–3): 724–727. doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2012.06.034. PMID 22776754. S2CID 43744551.
  27. ^ a b c Koster, E.H.W.; Crombez, G.; Verschuere, B.; De Houwer, J. (2004). "Selective attention to threat in the dot probe paradigm: Differentiating vigilance and difficulty to disengage". Behaviour Research and Therapy. 42 (10): 1183–1192. doi:10.1016/j.brat.2003.08.001. PMID 15350857.
  28. ^ MacLeod, C.; Mathews, A.; Tata, P. (1986). "Attentional bias in emotional disorders". Journal of Abnormal Psychology. 95 (1): 15–20. doi:10.1037/0021-843x.95.1.15. PMID 3700842.
  29. ^ Mogg, K.; Bradley, B. P. (1998). "A cognitive–motivational analysis of anxiety". Behaviour Research and Therapy. 36 (9): 809–848. doi:10.1016/s0005-7967(98)00063-1. PMID 9701859.
  30. ^ Asmundson, G.J.G.; Stein, M.B. (1994). "Selective processing of social threat in patients with generalized social phobia: Evaluation using a dot-probe paradigm". Journal of Anxiety Disorders. 8 (2): 107–117. doi:10.1016/0887-6185(94)90009-4.
  31. ^ Amir, N.; Naimi, S.; Morrison, A.S. (2009). "Attenuation of attention bias in obsessive-compulsive disorder". Behaviour Research and Therapy. 47 (2): 153–157. doi:10.1016/j.brat.2008.10.020. PMC 2662360. PMID 19046576.
  32. ^ Davis, M. (1986). "Pharmacological and anatomical analysis of fear conditioning using the fear-potentiated startle paradigm". Behavioral Neuroscience. 100 (6): 814–824. doi:10.1037/0735-7044.100.6.814. PMID 3545257.
  33. ^ Baskin-Sommers, A.R.; Vitale, J.E.; MacCoon, D.; Newman, J.P. (2012). "Assessing emotion sensitivity in female offenders with borderline personality symptoms: Results from a fear-potentiated startle paradigm". Journal of Abnormal Psychology. 121 (2): 477–483. doi:10.1037/a0026753. PMC 3358451. PMID 22250659.
  34. ^ a b Vaidyanathan, U.; Patrick, C.J.; Cuthbert, B.N. (2009). "Linking dimensional models of internalizing psychopathology to neurobiological systems: Affect-modulated startle as an indicator of fear and distress disorders and affiliated traits". Psychological Bulletin. 135 (6): 909–942. doi:10.1037/a0017222. PMC 2776729. PMID 19883142.
  35. ^ Lang, P. J.; Bradley, M. M.; Cuthbert, B. N. (1990). "Emotion, attention, and the startle reflex". Psychological Review. 97 (3): 377–395. doi:10.1037/0033-295x.97.3.377. PMID 2200076.
  36. ^ Vrana, S. R.; Spence, E. L.; Lang, P. J. (1988). "The startle probe response: A new measure of emotion?". Journal of Abnormal Psychology. 97 (4): 487–491. doi:10.1037/0021-843x.97.4.487. PMID 3204235.
  37. ^ Norrholm, S.D.; Anderson, K.M.; Olin, I.W.; Jovanovic, T.; Kwon, C.; Warren, Victor T.; Bradley, B.; Bosshardt, Lauren; Sabree, Justin; Duncan, Erica J.; Rothbaum, Barbara O.; Bradley, Bekh (2011). "Versatility of fear-potentiated startle paradigms for assessing human conditioned fear extinction and return of fear". Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience. 5: 77. doi:10.3389/fnbeh.2011.00077. PMC 3221285. PMID 22125516.
  38. ^ Grillon, C.; Ameli, R.; Woods, S. W.; Merikangas, K.; Davis, M. (1991). "Fear-potentiated startle in humans: Effects of anticipatory anxiety on the acoustic blink reflex". Psychophysiology. 28 (5): 588–595. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.1991.tb01999.x. PMID 1758934.
  39. ^ Norrholm, S.; Jovanovic, Tanja (2011). "Translational fear inhibition models as indices of trauma-related psychopathology". Current Psychiatry Reviews. 7 (3): 194–204. doi:10.2174/157340011797183193.
  40. ^ Norrholm, S. D.; Jovanovic, T.; Olin, I. W.; Sands, L.; Karapanou, I.; Bradley, B.; Ressler, K. J. (2010). "Fear extinction in traumatized civilians with posttraumatic stress disorder: relation to symptom severity". Biological Psychiatry. 69 (6): 556–563. doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2010.09.013. PMC 3052965. PMID 21035787.
  41. ^ Lang, P. J.; McTeague, L. M. (2009). "The anxiety disorder spectrum: Fear imagery, physiological reactivity, and differential diagnosis". Anxiety, Stress & Coping. 22 (1): 5–25. doi:10.1080/10615800802478247. PMC 2766521. PMID 19096959.
  42. ^ a b Cousens, G.A.; Kearns, A.; Laterza, F.; Tundidor, J. (2012). "Excitotoxic lesions of the medial amygdala attenuate olfactory fear-potentiated startle and conditioned freezing behavior". Behavioural Brain Research. 229 (2): 427–432. doi:10.1016/j.bbr.2012.01.011. PMID 22249137. S2CID 25116098.
  43. ^ Jovanovic, T; Norrholm, Seth D.; Fennell, Jennifer E.; Keyes, Megan; Fiallos, Ana M.; Myers, Karyn M.; Davis, Michael; Duncan, Erica J. (15 May 2009). "Posttraumatic stress disorder may be associated with impaired fear inhibition: relation to symptom severity". Psychiatry Research. 167 (1–2): 151–160. doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2007.12.014. PMC 2713500. PMID 19345420.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User:Mfs2162/Affective_neuroscience&oldid=1126032058"