Department of Psychology, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee, United States.
Center of Excellence for Stress and Mental Health, VA San Diego Healthcare System, United States; Department of Psychiatry, University of California San Diego, United States.
Biol Psychol. 2021 May;162:108091. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2021.108091. Epub 2021 Apr 20.
Evidence suggests that threatening stimuli induce attentional biases compared to neutral stimuli, leading to subsequent storage in working memory. The current study examined how threatening versus neutral word distracters influence attention, and how this affects the unnecessary storage of these task-irrelevant stimuli in working memory. We measured the N2pc and contralateral delay activity (CDA), two event-related potentials (ERPs) that index attentional selection and the number of items maintained in WM, respectively, as participants completed a lateralized change detection task using word stimuli. Our results replicated work demonstrating a CDA effect for word stimuli, and found that distracter words are unnecessarily stored in working memory. However, we observed non-significant differences in attentional bias and working memory storage between distracter word conditions, and individual variation in anxiety was not associated with these processes. Bayes Factor analyses supported these null effects, suggesting that differences between neutral and threatening distracter words are unlikely.
证据表明,与中性刺激相比,威胁性刺激会引起注意力偏向,从而导致随后在工作记忆中存储。本研究考察了威胁性和中性单词干扰项如何影响注意力,以及这如何影响这些与任务无关的刺激在工作记忆中的不必要存储。我们测量了 N2pc 和对侧延迟活动(CDA),这两个事件相关电位(ERP)分别表示注意力选择和在 WM 中保持的项目数量,参与者使用单词刺激完成了侧化变化检测任务。我们的结果复制了表明单词刺激存在 CDA 效应的工作,并发现干扰词在工作记忆中被不必要地存储。然而,我们在注意力偏向和干扰词条件下的工作记忆存储方面没有观察到显著差异,并且焦虑个体差异与这些过程无关。贝叶斯因子分析支持这些无效效应,表明中性和威胁性干扰词之间的差异不太可能。