1 / 4

Conscious and non-conscious conditioning in anxiety

Conscious and non-conscious conditioning in anxiety. Anne Richards, Naz Derakshan & Leor Shoker School of Psychology Birkbeck College. Amygdala and prefrontal activity in anxiety.

zihna
Télécharger la présentation

Conscious and non-conscious conditioning in anxiety

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Conscious and non-conscious conditioning in anxiety Anne Richards, Naz Derakshan & Leor Shoker School of Psychology Birkbeck College

  2. Amygdala and prefrontal activity in anxiety • Amygdala & hippocampus active for attended and unattended emotion, but may be stronger for unattended (Critchley et al, 2000; Habel et al., 2007; Keightly et al., 2003; Morris et al., 1998; Walen et al., 1998). • Prefrontal cortical activity is associated with attempts to regulate the outcome of attentional, interpretative and associative processes triggered by threat cue (e.g., Kalisch et al., 2006; Milad et al., 2007). • Outcome of attentional competition between neutral task and threat distractor possibly determined by relative strength of modulatory signals from PFC (supporting task-relevant processing) and amygdala (supporting threat stimuli) (Bishop, 2007). Amygdala active both groups, stronger in anxious Prefrontal: more active non-anxious Amygdala active both groups, stronger in anxious Richards & Blanchette (2004; submitted), Richards et al. (2007, submitted) • Predictions: • Amygdala activity for unmasked conditioning/Stroop and for masked conditiong/Stroop. More activity for anxious. More activity for masked? • Prefrontal activity for unmasked conditoning/Stroop, but larger for non-anxious • Behavioural effect for high-anxious for Congruent conditioning/Stroop • Affective ratings of masked and unmasked stimuli to check for conditioning success

  3. Design • Behavioural • Pre-test for anxiety (high vs. low) • Masked and Unmasked Conditioning (fMRI) • Masked and Unmasked Stroop (fMRI) - 2 (masked vs. unmasked) x 2 (negatively- vs neutrally-conditioned) • Affective Ratings Neutral Negative nimbu damf nimur nimbur dbz nimbur dbz nimur

  4. Design Specs: Conditioning (50 negative, 50 neutral). • duration ~= 15 mins Stroop task • duration ~= 16 mins fMRI • Whole brain fMRI (TR=3, TE=50ms, 3x3x3mm resolution) • ISI: 4-6 seconds • TR: 2282 ms/32 slices • 160 trials • 40 per condition • Block design • Collecting behavioural Stroop data Affective Ratings • Awareness Check • duration ~= 15 mins Participants: • 32, right-handed, 16 high and 16 low-anxious (pre-screened) • recruited from Birkbeck Participant Panel • No clinical history

More Related