Heart rate perception and expectation impact laboratory-induced perceived stress

IF 2.5 3区 心理学 Q3 NEUROSCIENCES
Tamás Nagy , Henriett Ipacs , Eszter Ferentzi , Ferenc Köteles
{"title":"Heart rate perception and expectation impact laboratory-induced perceived stress","authors":"Tamás Nagy ,&nbsp;Henriett Ipacs ,&nbsp;Eszter Ferentzi ,&nbsp;Ferenc Köteles","doi":"10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2024.112326","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Previous studies have shown that the human capacity to gauge one's own physiological state is notoriously flawed. The cause for the mismatch between perceived and physiological stress has not yet been properly identified. In this study, we assumed that cardioceptive accuracy (CAc) is positively associated with cardiovascular reactivity, and CAc and expectation about stress might account for the discrepancy between perceived and physiological stress. In a crossover experiment, we assessed cardioceptive accuracy in two ways (mental heartbeat tracking task and perception of heart rate), and induced physiological (handgrip exercise) and mental (N-back task) stress in 64 university students (51 % male, mean age 22.2). We assessed cardiac and electrodermal activity, and expected and perceived stress. We found that indicators of cardioceptive accuracy were not associated with cardiovascular reactivity. However, heart rate perception moderated the association between the change in heart rate and perceived stress in the physical but not in the mental task. Whereas heartbeat tracking accuracy was not associated with perceived stress. Moreover, perceived stress was predicted by the expected stress but not by the change in heart rate and electrodermal activity in the mental stress task. In conclusion, heart rate perception and expectation of stress may shape perceived stress more than actual physiological changes in moderate acute stress.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":54945,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Psychophysiology","volume":"199 ","pages":"Article 112326"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167876024000308/pdfft?md5=5e91aafca62812cf2b30b00045f6ea2f&pid=1-s2.0-S0167876024000308-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Psychophysiology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167876024000308","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Previous studies have shown that the human capacity to gauge one's own physiological state is notoriously flawed. The cause for the mismatch between perceived and physiological stress has not yet been properly identified. In this study, we assumed that cardioceptive accuracy (CAc) is positively associated with cardiovascular reactivity, and CAc and expectation about stress might account for the discrepancy between perceived and physiological stress. In a crossover experiment, we assessed cardioceptive accuracy in two ways (mental heartbeat tracking task and perception of heart rate), and induced physiological (handgrip exercise) and mental (N-back task) stress in 64 university students (51 % male, mean age 22.2). We assessed cardiac and electrodermal activity, and expected and perceived stress. We found that indicators of cardioceptive accuracy were not associated with cardiovascular reactivity. However, heart rate perception moderated the association between the change in heart rate and perceived stress in the physical but not in the mental task. Whereas heartbeat tracking accuracy was not associated with perceived stress. Moreover, perceived stress was predicted by the expected stress but not by the change in heart rate and electrodermal activity in the mental stress task. In conclusion, heart rate perception and expectation of stress may shape perceived stress more than actual physiological changes in moderate acute stress.

心率感知和预期会影响实验室引起的感知压力。
以往的研究表明,人类衡量自身生理状态的能力存在着众所周知的缺陷。造成感知压力和生理压力不匹配的原因尚未被正确识别。在本研究中,我们假设心感觉准确度(CAc)与心血管反应性呈正相关,而CAc和对压力的预期可能是造成感知压力与生理压力不一致的原因。在一项交叉实验中,我们通过两种方式(心理心跳跟踪任务和心率感知)评估了心感觉的准确性,并对 64 名大学生(51% 为男性,平均年龄 22.2 岁)进行了生理(手握运动)和心理(N-back 任务)压力诱导。我们对心电活动、预期压力和感知压力进行了评估。我们发现,心感觉准确性指标与心血管反应性无关。然而,在物理任务中,心率感知调节了心率变化与感知压力之间的关系,而在心理任务中则没有。而心跳跟踪的准确性与感知压力无关。此外,在心理压力任务中,预期压力可以预测感知压力,但心率和皮电活动的变化却不能预测感知压力。总之,在中度急性压力下,心率感知和对压力的预期可能比实际生理变化更能影响感知压力。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
10.00%
发文量
177
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Psychophysiology is the official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology, and provides a respected forum for the publication of high quality original contributions on all aspects of psychophysiology. The journal is interdisciplinary and aims to integrate the neurosciences and behavioral sciences. Empirical, theoretical, and review articles are encouraged in the following areas: • Cerebral psychophysiology: including functional brain mapping and neuroimaging with Event-Related Potentials (ERPs), Positron Emission Tomography (PET), Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) and Electroencephalographic studies. • Autonomic functions: including bilateral electrodermal activity, pupillometry and blood volume changes. • Cardiovascular Psychophysiology:including studies of blood pressure, cardiac functioning and respiration. • Somatic psychophysiology: including muscle activity, eye movements and eye blinks.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信