广泛性焦虑障碍的认知控制:主动和反应性抑制的调查

Ehsan Matinfar, I. Bigdeli, A. Mashhadi
{"title":"广泛性焦虑障碍的认知控制:主动和反应性抑制的调查","authors":"Ehsan Matinfar, I. Bigdeli, A. Mashhadi","doi":"10.52547/shefa.10.1.65","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"unknown aspects and neurocognitive accounts consider deficits in cognitive control as a basis for etiology and maintenance of this disorder. Cognitive control consists of three components; shifting, updating, and inhibition. The present study investigated inhibition as a facet of cognitive control in people with GAD. Materials and Methods: Using the voluntary sampling method, 80 students of the Ferdowsi University of Mashhad participated in this retrospective study. Via announcement on the campus of the university, normal students and those who had GAD symptoms contacted researchers. Based on the scores of the Penn State Worry Questionnaire (PSWQ) and structured diagnostic interview, participants were divided into two groups; control and GAD. Finally, the stop-signal task (SST) was used to assess reactive and proactive inhibition. Results: There was a significant positive correlation between reactive and proactive inhibition. The GAD group had significantly higher performance than the normal group in reactive and proactive inhibition. The GAD group also had more omission errors as well as fewer commission errors than the normal group. Conclusion: Inhibitory control plays a major role in GAD and explains several behavioral problems in this population. Excessive inhibition in GAD might be linked to behaviors, like freezing, procrastination, and threat detection in anxiety. Therefore, focusing on deficits in cognitive control and inhibition plays a major role in neurocognitive interventions of this","PeriodicalId":22899,"journal":{"name":"The Neuroscience Journal of Shefaye Khatam","volume":"83 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cognitive Control in Generalized Anxiety Disorder: Investigation of Proactive and Reactive Inhibition\",\"authors\":\"Ehsan Matinfar, I. Bigdeli, A. Mashhadi\",\"doi\":\"10.52547/shefa.10.1.65\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"unknown aspects and neurocognitive accounts consider deficits in cognitive control as a basis for etiology and maintenance of this disorder. Cognitive control consists of three components; shifting, updating, and inhibition. The present study investigated inhibition as a facet of cognitive control in people with GAD. Materials and Methods: Using the voluntary sampling method, 80 students of the Ferdowsi University of Mashhad participated in this retrospective study. Via announcement on the campus of the university, normal students and those who had GAD symptoms contacted researchers. Based on the scores of the Penn State Worry Questionnaire (PSWQ) and structured diagnostic interview, participants were divided into two groups; control and GAD. Finally, the stop-signal task (SST) was used to assess reactive and proactive inhibition. Results: There was a significant positive correlation between reactive and proactive inhibition. The GAD group had significantly higher performance than the normal group in reactive and proactive inhibition. The GAD group also had more omission errors as well as fewer commission errors than the normal group. Conclusion: Inhibitory control plays a major role in GAD and explains several behavioral problems in this population. Excessive inhibition in GAD might be linked to behaviors, like freezing, procrastination, and threat detection in anxiety. Therefore, focusing on deficits in cognitive control and inhibition plays a major role in neurocognitive interventions of this\",\"PeriodicalId\":22899,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Neuroscience Journal of Shefaye Khatam\",\"volume\":\"83 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Neuroscience Journal of Shefaye Khatam\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.52547/shefa.10.1.65\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Neuroscience Journal of Shefaye Khatam","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52547/shefa.10.1.65","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

未知的方面和神经认知的解释认为认知控制的缺陷是这种疾病的病因和维持的基础。认知控制包括三个组成部分;转移、更新和抑制。本研究调查了抑制作为广泛性焦虑症患者认知控制的一个方面。材料与方法:采用自愿抽样的方法,对80名马什哈德费尔多西大学的学生进行回顾性研究。通过大学校园的公告,正常学生和有广泛性焦虑症症状的学生联系了研究人员。根据宾夕法尼亚州立大学焦虑问卷(PSWQ)和结构化诊断访谈的得分,将参与者分为两组;控制和广泛性焦虑症。最后,使用停止信号任务(SST)来评估反应性和主动抑制。结果:反应性抑制与主动抑制呈显著正相关。广泛性焦虑症组在反应性和主动抑制方面的表现明显高于正常组。广泛性焦虑症组也比正常组有更多的遗漏错误和更少的委托错误。结论:抑制控制在广泛性焦虑症中起主要作用,并解释了该人群的一些行为问题。广泛性焦虑症的过度抑制可能与行为有关,如僵住、拖延症和焦虑时的威胁检测。因此,关注认知控制和抑制缺陷在神经认知干预中起着重要作用
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Cognitive Control in Generalized Anxiety Disorder: Investigation of Proactive and Reactive Inhibition
unknown aspects and neurocognitive accounts consider deficits in cognitive control as a basis for etiology and maintenance of this disorder. Cognitive control consists of three components; shifting, updating, and inhibition. The present study investigated inhibition as a facet of cognitive control in people with GAD. Materials and Methods: Using the voluntary sampling method, 80 students of the Ferdowsi University of Mashhad participated in this retrospective study. Via announcement on the campus of the university, normal students and those who had GAD symptoms contacted researchers. Based on the scores of the Penn State Worry Questionnaire (PSWQ) and structured diagnostic interview, participants were divided into two groups; control and GAD. Finally, the stop-signal task (SST) was used to assess reactive and proactive inhibition. Results: There was a significant positive correlation between reactive and proactive inhibition. The GAD group had significantly higher performance than the normal group in reactive and proactive inhibition. The GAD group also had more omission errors as well as fewer commission errors than the normal group. Conclusion: Inhibitory control plays a major role in GAD and explains several behavioral problems in this population. Excessive inhibition in GAD might be linked to behaviors, like freezing, procrastination, and threat detection in anxiety. Therefore, focusing on deficits in cognitive control and inhibition plays a major role in neurocognitive interventions of this
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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