Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Linköping University, Hus I:3, 581 83, Linköping, Sweden.
School of Law, Psychology and Social Work, Center for Health and Medical Psychology, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden.
BMC Psychol. 2022 Feb 21;10(1):33. doi: 10.1186/s40359-022-00751-6.
Suppressing intrusive thoughts can result in a post-suppression rebound effect where the same thoughts become hyperaccessible. The current study aimed to investigate if similar so-called rebound effects could be observed when people attempted to mentally suppress awareness of nonsensical auditory stimuli. Based on previous research on thought suppression and mental control in other domains, we hypothesized that attempting to suppress awareness of a task-irrelevant sound while under cognitive load would impact evaluations of the sound on affective dimensions and loudness, and result in increased general vigilance, as evidenced by faster responding on subsequent tasks.
We performed two experiments where participants in a suppression condition were initially instructed to mentally suppress awareness of a sound while performing a mentally challenging task. Participants in a control condition performed the same task without receiving any instructions regarding the sound. In Experiment 1, the sound was affectively neutral, while in Experiment 2 participants were presented with an inherently aversive (tinnitus-like) sound. After this initial phase, participants performed tasks measuring vigilance and attention, and were also asked to give subjective ratings of the sounds on a number of affective dimensions and loudness.
In Experiment 1, participants in the suppression condition showed faster response times on both a visual search task and an auditory spatial cueing task, as compared to participants in the control condition. Contrary to our predictions, participants in the suppression condition did not rate the distractor sound as louder than participants in the control condition, and there were no differences on affective dimensions. In Experiment 2, results revealed that participants in the suppression condition made more errors on a visual search task, specifically on trials where the previously suppressed sound was presented. In contrast to results from Experiment 1, participants in the suppression condition also rated the targeted sound as louder.
The findings provide preliminary support for a post-suppression rebound effect in the auditory domain and further suggest that this effect may be moderated by the emotional properties of the auditory stimulus.
抑制侵入性思维会导致抑制后反弹效应,即相同的思维变得更容易被感知。本研究旨在探究当人们试图在认知负荷下抑制对无关声音的意识时,是否会出现类似的所谓反弹效应。基于之前关于思维抑制和其他领域心理控制的研究,我们假设,在认知负荷下试图抑制对任务无关声音的意识会影响对声音在情感维度和响度上的评价,并导致警觉性增加,这表现为在后续任务中的反应更快。
我们进行了两项实验,在抑制条件下,参与者最初被指示在执行一项具有挑战性的任务时抑制对声音的意识。控制条件下的参与者在没有收到任何关于声音的指令的情况下执行相同的任务。在实验 1 中,声音是中性的,而在实验 2 中,参与者被呈现出一种内在厌恶的(类似耳鸣的)声音。在这个初始阶段之后,参与者执行了测量警觉性和注意力的任务,并被要求对声音在多个情感维度和响度上进行主观评价。
在实验 1 中,与控制条件下的参与者相比,抑制条件下的参与者在视觉搜索任务和听觉空间线索任务中的反应时间都更快。与我们的预测相反,抑制条件下的参与者并没有将分心声音的评价比控制条件下的参与者更大,而且在情感维度上也没有差异。在实验 2 中,结果表明,在视觉搜索任务中,抑制条件下的参与者犯了更多的错误,特别是在之前被抑制的声音出现的试验中。与实验 1 的结果相反,抑制条件下的参与者还将目标声音的评价调得更大。
这些发现为听觉领域的抑制后反弹效应提供了初步支持,并进一步表明,这种效应可能受到听觉刺激的情绪属性的调节。