Sluis Rachel A, Boschen Mark J, Neumann David L, Murphy Karen
Menzies Health Institute Queensland and School of Applied Psychology, Griffith University, Parklands Drive, Southport, QLD 4222, Australia.
Menzies Health Institute Queensland and School of Applied Psychology, Griffith University, Parklands Drive, Southport, QLD 4222, Australia.
J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry. 2017 Dec;57:172-179. doi: 10.1016/j.jbtep.2017.05.009. Epub 2017 Jun 1.
Cognitive models of social anxiety disorder (SAD) emphasize anticipatory processing as a prominent maintaining factor occurring before social-evaluative events. While anticipatory processing is a maladaptive process, the cognitive mechanisms that underlie ineffective control of attention are still unclear. The present study tested predictions derived from attentional control theory in a sample of undergraduate students high and low on social anxiety symptoms.
Participants were randomly assigned to either engage in anticipatory processing prior to a threat of a speech task or a control condition with no social evaluative threat. After completing a series of questionnaires, participants performed pro-saccades and antisaccades in response to peripherally presented facial expressions presented in either single-task or mixed-task blocks.
Correct antisaccade latencies were longer than correct pro-saccade latencies in-line with attentional control theory. High socially anxious individuals who anticipated did not exhibit impairment on the inhibition and shifting functions compared to high socially anxious individuals who did not anticipate or low socially anxious individuals in either the anticipatory or control condition. Low socially anxious individuals who anticipated exhibited shorter antisaccade latencies and a switch benefit compared to low socially anxious individuals in the control condition.
The study used an analogue sample; however findings from analogue samples are generally consistent with clinical samples.
The findings suggest that social threat induced anticipatory processing facilitates executive functioning for low socially anxious individuals when anticipating a social-evaluative situation.
社交焦虑障碍(SAD)的认知模型强调预期加工是社交评价事件之前出现的一个突出的维持因素。虽然预期加工是一个适应不良的过程,但注意力无效控制背后的认知机制仍不清楚。本研究在社交焦虑症状程度高和低的本科生样本中检验了从注意力控制理论得出的预测。
参与者被随机分配到在演讲任务威胁之前进行预期加工的组或没有社交评价威胁的对照组。完成一系列问卷后,参与者在单任务或混合任务块中对周边呈现的面部表情进行顺向眼跳和反向眼跳。
与注意力控制理论一致,正确的反向眼跳潜伏期比正确的顺向眼跳潜伏期长。在预期条件下,高社交焦虑个体与未预期的高社交焦虑个体或对照组中的低社交焦虑个体相比,在抑制和转换功能上没有表现出受损。与对照组中的低社交焦虑个体相比,预期条件下的低社交焦虑个体表现出较短的反向眼跳潜伏期和转换优势。
本研究使用了模拟样本;然而,模拟样本的研究结果通常与临床样本一致。
研究结果表明,社交威胁诱发的预期加工在低社交焦虑个体预期社交评价情境时促进了执行功能。