The Startle Reflex: A Measure of Emotion and “Attention” John J. Curtin, Ph.D. University of Wisconsin, Madison

1. The Startle Reflex: A Measure of Emotion and “Attention” John J. Curtin, Ph.D. University of Wisconsin, Madison

2. REFERENCES Anthony, B. J. (1985). In the blink of an eye: Implications of the reflex modification for information processing. In P. K. Ackles, J. R. Jennings, & M. G. M. Coles (Eds.), Advances in Psychophysiology (Vol. 1, pp. 167-218). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press Bradley, M. M., Cuthbert, B. N., & Lang, P. J. (1990). Startle reflex modification: Emotion or attention? Psychophysiology, 27, 513-522. Bradley, M. M., Cuthbert, B. N., & Lang, P. J. (1991). Startle and emotion: Lateral acoustic probes and the bilateral blink. Psychophysiology., 28, 285-295. Bradley, M. M., Cuthbert, B. N., & Lang, P. J. (1993). Pictures as prepulse: Attention and emotion in startle modification. Psychophysiology., 30, 541-545. Bradley, M. M. & Lang, P. J. (2000). Affective reactions to acoustic stimuli. Psychophysiology., 37, 204-215. Bradley, M. M., Lang, P. J., & Cuthbert, B. N. (1993). Emotion, novelty, and the startle reflex: Habituation in humans. Behavioral Neuroscience., 107, 970-980. Bradley, M. M., Cuthbert, B. N., & Lang, P. J. (1996). Picture media and emotion: Effects of a sustained affective content. Psychophysiology., 33, 662-670. Bradley, M. M., Lang, P. J., & Cuthbert, B. N. (1993). Emotion, novelty, and the startle reflex: Habituation in humans. Behavioral Neuroscience., 107, 970-980.

3. REFERENCES • Curtin, J. J., Lang, A. R., Patrick, C. J., & Stritzke, W. G. K. (1998). Alcohol and fear-potentiated startle: The role of competing cognitive demands in the stress-reducing effects of intoxication. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 107, 547-565. • Curtin, J. J., Patrick, C. J., Lang, A. R., Cacioppo, J. T., & Birbaumer, N. (2001). Alcohol affects emotion through cognition. Psychological Science., 12, 527-531. • Cuthbert, B. N., Bradley, M. M., & Lang, P. J. (1996). Probing picture perception: Activation and emotion. Psychophysiology., 33, 103-111. • Cuthbert, B. N. Schupp, H., Bradley, M., McManis, M., & Lang P. (1998). Probing affective picturesL Attended startle and tone probes. Psychophysiology, 35, 344-347. • Dichter, G. S., Tomarken, A. J., & Baucom, B. R. (2002). Startle modulation before, during and after exposure to emotional stimuli. International Journal of Psychophysiology., 43, 191-196. • Grillon, C., Davis, M., & Phillips, R. G. (1997). Fear-potentiated startle conditioning in humans: Explicit and contextual cue conditioning following paired versus unpaired training. Psychophysiology, 34, 451-458. • Miller, M. W., Curtin, J. J., & Patrick, C. J. (1999). A startle probe methodology for investigating the effects of active avoidance on negative emotional reactivity. Biological Psychology., 50, 235-257.

4. REFERENCES • Miller, M. W., Patrick, C. J., & Levenston, G. K. (2002). Affective imagery and the startle response: Probing mechanisms of modulation during pleasant scenes, personal experiences, and discrete negative emotions. Psychophysiology, 39, 519-529 • Patrick, C. J., Berthot, B. D., & Moore, J. D. (1996). Diazepam blocks fear-potentiated startle in humans. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 105 , 89-96. • Spence, K. W., & Runquist, W. H. (1958). Temporal effects of conditioned fear on the eyelid reflex. Journal of Experimental Psychology., 55, 613-616. • Stritzke, W. G. K., Patrick, C. J., & Lang, A. R. (1995). Alcohol and human emotion: A multidimensional analysis incorporating startle-probe methodology. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 104, 114-122. • van-Boxtel, A., Boelhouwer, A. J. W., & Bos, A. R. (1998). Optimal EMG signal bandwidth and interelectrode distance for the recording of acoustic, electrocutaneous and photic blink reflexes. Psychophysiology, 35, 690-697. • Vrana, S. R., Spence, E. L., & Lang, P. J. (1988). The startle probe response: A new measure of emotion? Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 97, 487-491.

5. The Startle Reflex and Emotion Response matching hypothesis • Startle reflex is a defensive response • The magnitude of the reflex is INCREASED when the organism is fearful (fear potentiated startle; FPS) • The magnitude of the reflex is DECREASED when the organism is “feeling good”***

6. Measurement of the Startle Reflex Measurement • Elicited with brief burst of white noise (“startle probe”) presented over headphones • Eyeblink response is indexed by recording electrical activity in the orbicularis oculi muscle

7. Neural Circuitry of Fear, Ledoux et al., Amygdala CG LH PVH RPC Freezing Blood Pressure Stress Hormones Startle Reflex

8. Sensory Thalamus Neural Circuitry of Fear, Ledoux et al., Amygdala CG LH PVH RPC Auditory Fear Stimulus Freezing Blood Pressure Stress Hormones Startle Reflex

9. Auditory Cortex Sensory Thalamus Neural Circuitry of Fear, Ledoux et al., Amygdala CG LH PVH RPC Auditory Fear Stimulus Freezing Blood Pressure Stress Hormones Startle Reflex

10. Auditory Cortex Sensory Thalamus Neural Circuitry of Fear, Ledoux et al., Association Cortex Hippocampal Formation Amygdala CG LH PVH RPC Auditory Fear Stimulus Freezing Blood Pressure Stress Hormones Startle Reflex

11. Neural Circuitry of Startle Reflex • Lesions of block FPS • Electrical stim enhances startle reflex Fear conditioning/ Shock sensitization Amygdala Nucleus Reticularis Pontis Caudalis (RPC) Cochlear Root Neurons Spinal & Facial Motonuerons Abrupt noise (probe) Startle Reflex

12. Fear Conditioning and Startle in Animals • Brown, Kalish, and Farber (1951) is classic animal study • Michael Davis and colleagues have demonstrated: • Increased FPS with increased shock intensity • Increased FPS with anxiogenics • Decreased FPS with anxiolytics

13. Fear Conditioning and Startle in Humans Spence & Runquist, 1958 • Forward and backward pairing of CS (light) with shock UCS • Airpuff probes presented at 500 and 4500ms post CS onset • Measured eyeblink closure

14. Attentional Modulation of Startle Attentional effects on reflex magnitude • Reviewed in Anthony (1985) • Increased if matches modality of foreground stimulus • Decreased as more attention is directed to foreground • Reaction time task (time course, covary with HR) • Interest level (Nudes vs. basket; tones vs. music; faces vs. blank screen)

15. Slide Viewing Paradigm Vrana, Spence, & Lang, 1988 • 36 slides (12 pleasant, 12 neutral, 12 unpleasant) • 6s presentation with 16-24s ITI • 9 unpredictable probe presentations within valence and 9 ITI startles

16. Additional Measures in Slide Viewing

17. Attention or Emotion in Slide Viewing Bradley, Cuthbert & Lang (1990) • Compared startle response to acoustic vs. visual probes during slide viewing • Regardless of probe modality, same direction of linear valence effect was observed

18. Lateralization of the Reflex Bradley, Cuthbert, and Lang (1991) • Monoaural probes to left and right ears during slide viewing and recorded left and right orbicularis startle response [see also, Bradley, Cuthbert and Lang, 1996] • No valence modulation elicited by right ear probes • Response is larger on ipsilateral measurement site • No interaction of measurement site with slide valence

19. Attention and Valence in Picture Processing Cuthbert, Schupp, Bradley, McManis, & Lang (1998) • Tones and probes presented during slide and ITI • Task was to press button to indicate detection of match (e.g., probe-probe) during ITI • Startle response to probe displays typical valence effect • P3 to probes (and tones) shows attentional effect to all affective material

20. Imagery and Startle Miller, Patrick, & Levenston (2002) • Participants trained to image standard or personal pleasant neutral or unpleasant scripts

21. Time Course of Response in Slide Viewing Bradley, Cuthbert, and Lang, 1993 • Examined startle across the slide viewing time-course • Early “pre-pulse”/attentional effects • Later valence effects

22. Arousal Effects Cuthbert, Bradley, & Lang, 1996 • Varied valence (pleasant, neutral, and unpleasant) and arousal (3 levels) ratings of slides • 3 probe intensities (80, 95, and 105 dB) • Skin and HR effects vs. Startle effects

23. Habituation of the Startle Reflex Bradley, M. M., Lang, P. J., & Cuthbert, B. N. (1993). Emotion, novelty, and the startle reflex: Habituation in humans. Behavioral Neuroscience., 107(6), 970-980. Previous research with both animal and human Ss has shown that startle reflex magnitude is potentiated in an aversive stimulus context, relative to responses elicited in a neutral or appetitive context. In the present experiment, the same pleasant, unpleasant, and neutral picture stimuli were repeatedly presented to human Ss. Startle reflex habituation was assessed in each stimulus context and was compared with the habituation patterns of heart rate, electrodermal, and facial corrugator muscle responses. All systems showed initial differentiation among affective picture contents and general habituation over trials. The startle reflex alone, however, continued to differentiate among pleasant, neutral, and unpleasant pictures throughout the presentation series. These results suggest that (1) the startle probe reflex is relatively uninfluenced by stimulus novelty, (2) the startle modulatory circuit (identified with amygdala-reticular connections in animals) varies systematically with affective valence, and (3) the modulatory influence is less subject to habituation than is the obligatory startle pathway or responses in other somatic and autonomic systems.

24. Discrete Periods in Slide Viewing Dichter, Tomarken, & Baucom, 2002 • Examined startle before (1.5-2.5s), during (3.5-4.5s) and after (1.5-2.5s) a slide viewing period • Valence cued with arrow followed 4s later by slide

25. Startle and Mood effects Bradley, Cuthbert, & Lang, 1996 • Presented slides blocked on valence (24 per valence) • Examined slide viewing and inter-slide interval effects • Included startle, corrugator, SC and HR. Also, affective judgment of words

26. Startle during Sound Perception Bradley & Lang, 2000 • 60 affective sounds (listen to example) • Visual startle probes • Observed typical linear valence effect for startle

27. Stress Response Dampening Model • Alcohol intoxication produces a direct, pharmacological suppression of activity in the defensive (fear/anxiety) system. • Therefore, alcohol consumption is reinforcing -- particularly when consumed in stressful contexts.

28. Method Participants • Standard emotional slide viewing paradigm • 36 slides (12 pos, 12 neut, 12 neg) • Slides presented for 6 seconds • 36 social drinkers in 2 beverage conditions: Alcohol (0.075%) and No-alcohol Paradigm Measures • Startle response • Corrugator (frown) EMG • Autonomic measures (SC, HR) • Slide ratings (valence, arousal) Stritzke, Patrick, & Lang, (1995). Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 104, 114-122.

29. Valence Modulated Startle Alcohol does not affect the “valence modulated” startle response. (i.e. sig. linear effect in both groups)

30. Overall Startle Response Alcohol produces a significant reduction in overall blink magnitude (and latency, not displayed).

31. Skin Conductance Response Alcohol does reduce arousal response, but to all emotional slides, regardless of slide valence.

32. Diazepam and Startle • Patrick, Berthot, & Moore (1996) • Placebo or diazepam (Valium) • Negative and neutral slide viewing paradigm • Dose dependent effect of diazepam on fear potentiated startle to negative slides

33. Attention Allocation Model • Alcohol intoxication reduces “attentional capacity” (Alcohol myopia) • Alcohol focuses attention on the most salient stimuli in the environment • If the most salient stimulus in the environment is pleasant, stress response will be reduced • Note: If most salient stimulus is stressor, stress response will be increased

34. Method Participants • 48 social drinkers in 2 beverage conditions: Alcohol (0.075%) and No-alcohol Measures • Startle response • Corrugator (frown) EMG • Autonomic measures (SC, HR) Curtin, Lang, Patrick, & Stritzke, W. G. K. (1998). Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 107, 547-565.

35. Method • 8 blocks alternating between Shock threat and Safe • 6 positive slides in each block • 6 startle probes in each block - half during slide presentation (distraction) - half during inter-slide interval (no-distraction) • Fear poteniated startle (FPS) is the difference between startle response in Shock threat vs. Safe blocks ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Key ! - Slide - Startle probe

36. Tonic Levels of SC and Corrugator • Threat manipulation increased SCL and Corrugator level. • Beverage does not moderate this threat effect.

37. Phasic Response to Threat Cue • Sig. threat effect in phasic response to block onset light cue • Beverage did not moderate this effect

38. Fear Potentiated Startle Threshold for significant FPS • In no-distraction condition, sig. FPS observed in both beverage groups. • In distraction condition, sig. FPS observed only in no-alcohol group.

39. Method Participants • 48 social drinkers in 2 beverage conditions Alcohol (0.08%) and No-alcohol Measures • Startle response • Event related potentials (focused on P3) • Task performance Curtin et al., (2001). Psychological Science

40. Method Block Structure • 24 blocks of trials (20 trials per block) • 8 Threat-focus blocks • 16 Divided attention blocks Trial Structure Startle Shock Button press ! S2 ^ S1 300ms 1400ms 300ms 200ms 300ms S1 Threat-focus:Animal/Body-part Divided attention:Animal/Body-partor Animal/Body-part

41. Next Block: SHOCK Only Read each word as it is presented Shocks to animal words

43. HEAD

47. NECK