Inbound friend or foe: how motion bistability is resolved under threat

IF 1.7 3区心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL

Motivation and Emotion Pub Date : 2024-08-21 DOI:10.1007/s11031-024-10085-y

Fábio Silva, Ana C. Magalhães, Daniela Fidalgo, Nuno Gomes, Marta I. Garrido, Sandra C. Soares

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Anxiety prepares us to deal with unpredictable threats, such as the approaching of an unknown person. Studies have shown our innate tendency to see approaching motion in ambiguous walkers in what was termed facing-the-viewer (FTV) bias. Here we investigated if anxiety states further contributed to this bias, hypothesizing that such states would increase overall FTV biases. Throughout three Experiments, we asked participants to judge the motion direction of ambiguous point-light walkers and measured their respective FTV biases under safe and anxiety-related conditions induced via imagery (Experiment 1), screaming sounds (Experiment 2), and threat of shock (Experiment 3). Across all experiments, we showed that anxiety does not affect our tendency to perceive an approaching behavior in ambiguous walkers. Based on our findings, and the discrepancies found in the literature, we emphasize the need for future studies to paint a clearer picture on the nature and aspects capable of affecting this bias.

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

入境是敌是友：运动双稳态如何在威胁下解决

焦虑让我们做好了应对不可预知的威胁的准备，例如未知人物的接近。研究表明，我们与生俱来地倾向于在模棱两可的行人身上看到接近的动作，这就是所谓的面向观察者（FTV）偏差。在这里，我们研究了焦虑状态是否会进一步导致这种偏差，并假设这种状态会增加整体的 FTV 偏差。在三个实验中，我们要求参与者判断模棱两可的点光步行者的运动方向，并测量他们在安全和焦虑相关条件下各自的 FTV 偏差，这些条件分别是通过想象（实验 1）、尖叫声（实验 2）和电击威胁（实验 3）诱发的。在所有实验中，我们发现焦虑并不会影响我们感知模糊步行者接近行为的倾向。基于我们的研究结果以及文献中发现的差异，我们强调今后的研究需要更清晰地描绘出影响这种偏差的性质和方面。

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

Motivation and Emotion Multiple-

CiteScore

5.40

自引率

4.20%

发文量

期刊介绍： Motivation and Emotion publishes articles on human motivational and emotional phenomena that make theoretical advances by linking empirical findings to underlying processes. Submissions should focus on key problems in motivation and emotion, and, if using non-human participants, should contribute to theories concerning human behavior. Articles should be explanatory rather than merely descriptive, providing the data necessary to understand the origins of motivation and emotion, to explicate why, how, and under what conditions motivational and emotional states change, and to document that these processes are important to human functioning.A range of methodological approaches are welcome, with methodological rigor as the key criterion. Manuscripts that rely exclusively on self-report data are appropriate, but published articles tend to be those that rely on objective measures (e.g., behavioral observations, psychophysiological responses, reaction times, brain activity, and performance or achievement indicators) either singly or combination with self-report data.The journal generally does not publish scale development and validation articles. However, it is open to articles that focus on the post-validation contribution that a new measure can make. Scale development and validation work therefore may be submitted if it is used as a necessary prerequisite to follow-up studies that demonstrate the importance of the new scale in making a theoretical advance.