Cognitive Psychology Unit and Leiden Institute for Brain and Cognition, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Department of Cognitive Psychology, Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience, Faculty of Psychology, Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany.
Psychol Res. 2020 Feb;84(1):204-216. doi: 10.1007/s00426-018-0986-7. Epub 2018 Jan 23.
The aim of the study was to throw more light on the relationship between rumination and cognitive-control processes. Seventy-eight adults were assessed with respect to rumination tendencies by means of the LEIDS-r before performing a Stroop task, an event-file task assessing the automatic retrieval of irrelevant information, an attentional set-shifting task, and the Attentional Network Task, which provided scores for alerting, orienting, and executive control functioning. The size of the Stroop effect and irrelevant retrieval in the event-five task were positively correlated with the tendency to ruminate, while all other scores did not correlate with any rumination scale. Controlling for depressive tendencies eliminated the Stroop-related finding (an observation that may account for previous failures to replicate), but not the event-file finding. Taken altogether, our results suggest that rumination does not affect attention, executive control, or response selection in general, but rather selectively impairs the control of stimulus-induced retrieval of irrelevant information.
本研究旨在深入探讨反刍思维与认知控制过程之间的关系。通过 LEIDS-r 量表,对 78 名成年人的反刍思维倾向进行评估,然后让他们完成 Stroop 任务、事件文件任务(评估自动提取无关信息的能力)、注意定势转移任务和注意网络任务,这些任务提供了警觉、定向和执行控制功能的分数。Stroop 效应的大小和事件文件任务中的无关信息提取与反刍思维倾向呈正相关,而其他所有分数与任何反刍量表均无相关性。控制抑郁倾向消除了与 Stroop 相关的发现(这一观察结果可能解释了之前未能复制的原因),但事件文件的发现并未消除。总的来说,我们的结果表明,反刍思维一般不会影响注意力、执行控制或反应选择,而是选择性地损害对刺激诱导的无关信息提取的控制。