Department of Psychology, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Engineering Psychology, Department of Health, Learning and Technology, Luleå University of Technology, Luleå, Sweden.
Brain Behav. 2022 May;12(5):e2554. doi: 10.1002/brb3.2554. Epub 2022 Apr 11.
The negative cognitive effects of the startle response are not yet fully understood. Ecological observations in the aviation field indicate risk for severe outcomes in complex or pressured situations, while sparse previous research suggests milder negative effects on simple cognitive tasks. Neuroticism is proposed as a factor related to the level of negative effects following startle.
This study examined the effects of startle on performance in a choice reaction time task and analyzed relations between performance, neuroticism, and physiological stress.
Our results indicate that reaction time directly following startle was not affected, but reaction time in subsequent trials was significantly slower. Neuroticism and physiological stress were both unrelated to this performance effect.
We argue that higher complexity/demand tasks are necessary to complement the research on base cognitive functioning in relation to startle. If neuroticism is related to startle effects, this is more likely to be found in these higher demand situations.
惊跳反应的负面认知效应尚不完全清楚。航空领域的生态观察表明，在复杂或紧张的情况下，存在严重后果的风险，而先前的研究表明，在简单的认知任务中，惊跳反应会产生更轻微的负面影响。神经质被认为是与惊跳反应后负面效应水平相关的一个因素。
本研究考察了惊跳反应对选择反应时任务表现的影响，并分析了表现、神经质和生理应激之间的关系。
我们的结果表明，惊跳反应后直接的反应时间不受影响，但后续试验中的反应时间明显变慢。神经质和生理应激都与这种表现效应无关。
我们认为，需要更复杂/高要求的任务来补充与惊跳反应相关的基础认知功能研究。如果神经质与惊跳反应的效应有关，那么这种关系更可能出现在这些高需求的情况下。
