9 research outputs found

    Correlation between Brain Activity and WM Performance.

    No full text
    <p>The r values correspond to the co-variation between the signal extracted from the whole ROIs (as identified by the triple conjunction) and WM performance. The statistical differences between the effects for emotional and neutral distracters, as tested using the r-to-z transformation for comparison of nonoverlapping correlations <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0014150#pone.0014150-Bruning1" target="_blank">[39]</a>, are reported in the last column. LPFC  =  Lateral Prefrontal Cortex.</p><p>*Significance at p<0.05.</p><p>**Significance at p<0.01.</p><p>***Significance at p<0.005.</p

    Co-variation between activity in the right fusiform gyrus (FG) and individual differences in WM performance.

    No full text
    <p>Consistent with a bottom-up impact of emotional distraction on cognitive performance, the right FG showed increased overall activity (red blob) and negative correlation with the LOC3 WM performance (the white blob within the red blob). The negative correlation, illustrated in the right side scatterplot was specific for the emotional distracters (see <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0014150#pone-0014150-t004" target="_blank">Table 4</a>). The middle panel illustrates the activation and correlation maps superimposed on high resolution brain images, displayed in coronal view. The line graph in the left side panel illustrates the time course of fMRI signal, as extracted from the whole ROI meeting the triple conjunction criteria, on a TR-by-TR basis.</p

    Opposite patterns of activity and co-variation in the ventral vs. dorsal neural systems in the presence of anxiety-inducing distracters.

    No full text
    <p>Consistent with a bottom-up effect of emotional distraction on brain activity, ventral regions associated with perception (FG, bottom panels) and experiencing of emotion (vmPFC, middle panels) showed <i>in</i>creased overall activity (red blobs) and positive correlations with anxiety scores (white blobs within the red blobs), whereas dorsal regions associated with executive functions (e.g., dlPFC, top panels) showed <i>de</i>creased overall activity (blue blobs) and negative correlations with anxiety scores (white blobs within the blue blobs). Because in the FG the correlation was specific for social anxiety, whereas in the vmPFC it was larger for general anxiety (see <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0014150#pone-0014150-t003" target="_blank">Table 3</a>), the scatterplots on the right side of the figure are based on the corresponding correlations of the signal extracted from the ROIs with the LSAS and STAI-T scores, respectively. In the vmPFC, the positive correlation was specific for the emotional distraction - i.e., the correlation was significant for the emotional but not for the neutral distracters, and the difference between these two correlations was also significant (see <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0014150#pone-0014150-t003" target="_blank">Table 3</a>). In the dlPFC, although in the whole ROI (white blob) the negative correlation was not statistically greater for the emotional distracters (see <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0014150#pone-0014150-t003" target="_blank">Table 3</a>), a restricted area within this ROI (the black blob within the white blob) showed specificity for the emotional distracters. As illustrated in the top right scatterplot, the correlation was significant for the emotional but not for the neutral distracters, and the difference between these two correlations was also significant (t = −1.92; p = 0.04). A similar pattern was also observed in the dmPFC (not shown). The activation and conjunction/correlation maps are superimposed on high resolution brain images displayed in coronal views (y indicates the Talairach coordinate on the anterior-posterior axis of the brain). The line graphs on the left side panels illustrate the time courses of the fMRI signal, as extracted from the ROIs meeting the triple conjunction criteria (the white blobs), on a TR-by-TR basis (1 TR = 2 seconds). FG  =  Fusiform Gyrus; vmPFC  =  Ventro-medial Prefrontal Cortex; dlPFC  =  Dorso-lateral Prefrontal Cortex; L =  Left; R =  Right; TR  =  Repetition Time.</p

    Correlations between Brain Activity and A. General Trait Anxiety (STAI-T scores) and B. Specific Social Trait Anxiety (LSAS scores).

    No full text
    <p>The r values correspond to the co-variation between the signal extracted from the whole ROIs (as identified by the triple conjunction), and anxiety scores. The statistical differences between the effects for emotional and neutral distracters, as tested using the r-to-t transformation for comparison of overlapping correlations <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0014150#pone.0014150-Bruning1" target="_blank">[39]</a>, are noted in the last column.</p><p>*Significance at p<0.05.</p><p>**Significance at p<0.01.</p><p>***Significance at p<0.005.</p>†<p>p<0.06.</p><p>Note:</p>1<p>Effects present at lower extent threshold or absent for general or social anxiety. In the Fusiform Gyrus (FG), the correlation was strong for social anxiety, but absent for general anxiety. In the ventro-medial PFC (vmPFC), the effect was overall larger for general anxiety, but still present for social anxiety at a lower extent threshold (3 voxels). In the dorso-medial PFC (dmPFC) both effects were present, but at a lower extent threshold for general anxiety (9 voxels).</p

    Evidence for the role of the PFC in coping with emotional distraction.

    No full text
    <p>Regions in the dorso-medial and left lateral PFC showed positive correlations with the LOC3 WM performance (white blobs within the blue blobs), despite showing overall decreased activity (blue blobs) in the presence of emotional distraction. In both cases, the correlations were significant only for the emotional distracters, and in the dmPFC the correlation for emotional distracter was also statistically greater than for the neutral distracters (see <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0014150#pone-0014150-t004" target="_blank">Table 4</a>). The line graphs in the left side panels illustrate the time course of fMRI signal, as extracted from the whole ROIs meeting the triple conjunction criteria, on TR-by-TR. The activation and correlation maps are superimposed on high resolution brain images displayed in coronal views.</p

    The detrimental effect of transient anxiety-inducing distraction on WM performances was reflected in responses with the highest level of confidence (LOC3).

    No full text
    <p>A two-way ANOVA on corrected recognition scores (% Hits – % FAs) yielded a significant level of confidence (LOC1, LOC2, LOC3) x distracter type (emotional, neutral, scrambled) interaction (F <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0014150#pone.0014150-Phan1" target="_blank">[4]</a>, <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0014150#pone.0014150-Banich1" target="_blank">[60]</a>  = 8.57; p<0.00002), and post-hoc analyses showed that the emotional distraction had an impairing effect only on LOC3, with the emotional distracters being associated with lower level of performance compared to both neutral (p<0.02) and scrambled distracters (p<0.0005). Emo = Emotional Distracter; Neu  =  Neutral Distracters; Scr  =  Scrambled Distracters; FAs  =  False Alarms; WM  =  Working Memory. Error bars represent standard errors.</p

    Differential Effect of Emotional Distraction in Ventral vs. Dorsal Neural Systems.

    No full text
    <p>vmPFC  =  Ventro-medial Prefrontal Cortex; TOC  =  Temporo-Occipital Cortex; dlPFC  =  Dorso-lateral Prefrontal Cortex; dmPFC  =  Dorso-medial Prefrontal Cortex; LFC  =  Lateral Frontal Cortex; LPC  =  Lateral Parietal Cortex; MPC  =  Medial Parietal Cortex; LTC  =  Lateral Temporal Cortex; MOC  =  Medial Occipital Cortex; BA  =  Brodmann Area; <i>x, y, z</i> denote coordinates in the Talairach space <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0014150#pone.0014150-Talairach1" target="_blank">[74]</a>; TR  =  Repetition Time; Emo  =  Emotional Distracter; Neu  =  Neutral Distracters; Scr  =  Scrambled Distracters.</p

    Diagram of the WM Task with Anxiety-Inducing Distraction.

    No full text
    <p>Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data were recorded while subjects performed a working memory (WM) task for faces, with distraction presented during the delay interval between the memoranda and probes. To increase the impact, the novel distracters were morphed. The WM performance was measured using a recognition memory task, in which participants indicated by pushing a button whether single-face probes were part of the memoranda (<i>Old</i> = 1) or not (<i>New</i> = 2), and then they indicated the level of confidence (LOC) in their responses by pushing one of three buttons (1 = Low, 2 = Medium, 3 = High). All stimuli were presented in colour. Written informed consent for photograph publication was obtained for all faces illustrated in the figure that are not part of the standardized NimStim Face Stimulus Set.</p

    Supplemental material 1 for Rationale, design, and baseline participant characteristics in the MRI and cognitive substudy of the cardiovascular outcomes for people using anticoagulation strategies trial

    No full text
    <p>Supplemental material 1 for Rationale, design, and baseline participant characteristics in the MRI and cognitive substudy of the cardiovascular outcomes for people using anticoagulation strategies trial by Mukul Sharma, Robert G Hart, Eric E Smith, Jackie Bosch, Fei Yuan, Amparo Casanova, John W Eikelboom, Stuart J Connolly, Gloria Wong, Rafael Diaz, Patricio Lopez-Jaramillo, Georg Ertl, Stefan Störk, Gilles R Dagenais, Eva M Lonn, Lars Ryden, Andrew M Tonkin, John D Varigos, Deepak L Bhatt, Kelley RH Branch, Jeffrey L Probstfield, Jae-Hyung Kim, Jong-Won Ha, Martin O’Donnell, Dragos Vinereanu, Keith AA Fox, Yan Liang, Lisheng Liu, Jun Zhu, Nana Pogosova, Aldo P Maggioni, Alvaro Avezum, Leopoldo S Piegas, Katalin Keltai, Matyas Keltai, Nancy Cook Bruns, Scott Berkowitz and Salim Yusuf in International Journal of Stroke</p
    corecore