听到恐惧的前奏会损害视觉工作记忆的维持。

IF 2.5 3区 心理学 Q3 NEUROSCIENCES
François Thiffault , Justine Cinq-Mars , Benoît Brisson , Isabelle Blanchette
{"title":"听到恐惧的前奏会损害视觉工作记忆的维持。","authors":"François Thiffault ,&nbsp;Justine Cinq-Mars ,&nbsp;Benoît Brisson ,&nbsp;Isabelle Blanchette","doi":"10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2024.112338","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Interference by distractors has been associated multiple times with diminished visual and auditory working memory (WM) performance. Negative emotional distractors in particular lead to detrimental effects on WM. However, these associations have only been seen when distractors and items to maintain in WM are from the same sensory modality. In this study, we investigate cross-modal interference on WM. We invited 20 participants to complete a visual change-detection task, assessing visual WM (VWM), while hearing emotional (fearful) and neutral auditory distractors. Electrophysiological activity was recorded to measure contralateral delay activity (CDA) and auditory P2 event-related potentials (ERP), indexing WM maintenance and distractor salience respectively. At the behavioral level, fearful prosody didn't decrease significantly working memory accuracy, compared to neutral prosody. Regarding ERPs, fearful distractors evoked a greater P2 amplitude than neutral distractors. Correlations between the two ERP potentials indicated that P2 amplitude difference between the two types of prosody was associated with the difference in CDA amplitude for fearful and neutral trials. This association suggests that cognitive resources required to process fearful prosody detrimentally impact VWM maintenance. That result provides a piece of additional evidence that negative emotional stimuli produce greater interference than neutral stimuli and that the cognitive resources used to process stimuli from different modalities come from a common pool.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":54945,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Psychophysiology","volume":"199 ","pages":"Article 112338"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167876024000424/pdfft?md5=9bb76899bc5728f25a2c55b71fbc15ed&pid=1-s2.0-S0167876024000424-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hearing fearful prosody impairs visual working memory maintenance\",\"authors\":\"François Thiffault ,&nbsp;Justine Cinq-Mars ,&nbsp;Benoît Brisson ,&nbsp;Isabelle Blanchette\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2024.112338\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Interference by distractors has been associated multiple times with diminished visual and auditory working memory (WM) performance. Negative emotional distractors in particular lead to detrimental effects on WM. However, these associations have only been seen when distractors and items to maintain in WM are from the same sensory modality. In this study, we investigate cross-modal interference on WM. We invited 20 participants to complete a visual change-detection task, assessing visual WM (VWM), while hearing emotional (fearful) and neutral auditory distractors. Electrophysiological activity was recorded to measure contralateral delay activity (CDA) and auditory P2 event-related potentials (ERP), indexing WM maintenance and distractor salience respectively. At the behavioral level, fearful prosody didn't decrease significantly working memory accuracy, compared to neutral prosody. Regarding ERPs, fearful distractors evoked a greater P2 amplitude than neutral distractors. Correlations between the two ERP potentials indicated that P2 amplitude difference between the two types of prosody was associated with the difference in CDA amplitude for fearful and neutral trials. This association suggests that cognitive resources required to process fearful prosody detrimentally impact VWM maintenance. That result provides a piece of additional evidence that negative emotional stimuli produce greater interference than neutral stimuli and that the cognitive resources used to process stimuli from different modalities come from a common pool.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54945,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Psychophysiology\",\"volume\":\"199 \",\"pages\":\"Article 112338\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167876024000424/pdfft?md5=9bb76899bc5728f25a2c55b71fbc15ed&pid=1-s2.0-S0167876024000424-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/S0167876024000424\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROSCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Psychophysiology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167876024000424","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

摘要

分心物的干扰多次与视觉和听觉工作记忆(WM)能力的下降有关。负面情绪干扰物尤其会对工作记忆产生不利影响。然而,这些关联只有在分心物和保持在 WM 中的项目来自同一感官模式时才会出现。在本研究中,我们调查了跨模态干扰对 WM 的影响。我们邀请 20 名参与者在听到情绪(恐惧)和中性听觉分心物的同时完成一项视觉变化检测任务,以评估视觉 WM(VWM)。我们记录了电生理活动,以测量对侧延迟活动(CDA)和听觉 P2 事件相关电位(ERP),它们分别反映了 WM 的维持和分心物的显著性。在行为层面上,与中性拟声词相比,恐惧拟声词并没有明显降低工作记忆的准确性。在ERP方面,与中性分心物相比,恐惧分心物引起的P2振幅更大。两种ERP电位之间的相关性表明,两种拟声词之间的P2振幅差异与恐惧和中性试验的CDA振幅差异有关。这种关联表明,处理恐惧拟声所需的认知资源会对 VWM 的维持产生不利影响。这一结果提供了一个额外的证据,即负面情绪刺激比中性刺激产生更大的干扰,而且用于处理不同模式刺激的认知资源来自一个共同的资源库。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Hearing fearful prosody impairs visual working memory maintenance

Interference by distractors has been associated multiple times with diminished visual and auditory working memory (WM) performance. Negative emotional distractors in particular lead to detrimental effects on WM. However, these associations have only been seen when distractors and items to maintain in WM are from the same sensory modality. In this study, we investigate cross-modal interference on WM. We invited 20 participants to complete a visual change-detection task, assessing visual WM (VWM), while hearing emotional (fearful) and neutral auditory distractors. Electrophysiological activity was recorded to measure contralateral delay activity (CDA) and auditory P2 event-related potentials (ERP), indexing WM maintenance and distractor salience respectively. At the behavioral level, fearful prosody didn't decrease significantly working memory accuracy, compared to neutral prosody. Regarding ERPs, fearful distractors evoked a greater P2 amplitude than neutral distractors. Correlations between the two ERP potentials indicated that P2 amplitude difference between the two types of prosody was associated with the difference in CDA amplitude for fearful and neutral trials. This association suggests that cognitive resources required to process fearful prosody detrimentally impact VWM maintenance. That result provides a piece of additional evidence that negative emotional stimuli produce greater interference than neutral stimuli and that the cognitive resources used to process stimuli from different modalities come from a common pool.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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