Reflecting on existential threats elicits self-reported negative affect but no physiological arousal

There is mixed evidence whether reflecting on an existential threat increases negativeaffect and thereby elicits subjective arousal and physiological activation. Additionally,it is debated whether different existential and non-existential threats elicit differentarousal responses, although systematic comparisons are lacking. The current studyexplored affective, subjective, and physiological arousal responses while comparingseveral existential threats with a non-existential threat and with a control condition.One-hundred-and-seventy-one undergraduate students were randomly allocated toone of four existential threat conditions: mortality salience (MS), freedom restriction,uncontrollability, and uncertainty; or to the non-existential threat condition: socialevaluative threat (SET); or to a control condition (TV salience). Self-reportedpositive/negative affect was measured before and after reflection, while subjectivearousal and physiological activation (electrodermal, cardiovascular, and respiratory)were measured on a high time-scale during baseline and reflection. Results showedlarger increases in self-reported negative affect, as compared to the control condition,for all existential threat conditions, while there were no differences between thecontrol condition and threat conditions regarding positive affect, subjective arousal,skin conductance, respiratory rate, and respiratory sinus arrythmia. There were subtledifferences between existential and non-existential threat conditions, most notably inaffective responses. Correlations showed positive associations between negative affectand subjective arousal and between trait avoidance and subjective arousal. This studyis the first to systematically compare affective, subjective, and physiological changes inarousal due to reflecting on different existential threats, as well as one non-existentialthreat. We showed that, as compared to a control condition, reflecting on threats has alarge impact on negative affect, but no significant impact on positive affect, subjectivearousal, and physiological activation. Social decision makin

Fear of negative evaluation modulates electrocortical and behavioral responses when anticipating social evaluative feedback

Cognitive models posit that the fear of negative evaluation (FNE) is a hallmark feature of social anxiety. As such, individuals with high FNE may show biased information processing when faced with social evaluation. The aim of the current study was to examine the neural underpinnings of anticipating and processing social-evaluative feedback, and its correlates with FNE. We used a social judgment paradigm in which female participants (N= 31) were asked to indicate whether they believed to be socially accepted or rejected by their peers. Anticipatory attention was indexed by the stimulus preceding negativity (SPN), while the feedback-related negativity and P3 were used to index the processing of social-evaluative feedback. Results provided evidence of an optimism bias in social peer evaluation, as participants more often predicted to be socially accepted than rejected. Participants with high levels of FNE needed more time to provide their judgments about the social-evaluative outcome. While anticipating social-evaluative feedback, SPN amplitudes were larger for anticipated social acceptance than for social rejection feedback. Interestingly, the SPN during anticipated social acceptance was larger in participants with high levels of FNE. None of the feedback-related brain potentials correlated with the FNE. Together, the results provided evidence of biased information processing in individuals with high levels of FNE when anticipating (rather than processing) social-evaluative feedback. The delayed response times in high FNE individuals were interpreted to reflect augmented vigilance imposed by the upcoming social-evaluative threat. Possibly, the SPN constitutes a neural marker of this vigilance in females with higher FNE levels, particularly when anticipating social acceptance feedback.Pathways through Adolescenc

Frontal delta-beta cross-frequency coupling in high and low social anxiety: An index of stress regulation?

Cross-frequency coupling (CFC) between frontal delta (1-4 Hz) and beta (14-30 Hz) oscillations has been suggested as a candidate neural correlate of social anxiety disorder, a disorder characterized by fear and avoidance of social and performance situations. Prior studies have used amplitude-amplitude correlation (AAC) as a CFC measure and hypothesized it as a candidate neural mechanism of affective control. However, using this metric has yielded inconsistent results regarding the direction of CFC, and the functional significance of coupling strength is uncertain. To offer a better understanding of CFC in social anxiety, we compared frontal delta-beta AAC with phase-amplitude coupling (PAC) - a mechanism for information transfer through neural circuits. Twenty high socially anxious (HSA) and 32 low socially anxious (LSA) female undergraduates participated in a social performance task (SPT). Delta-beta PAC and AAC were estimated during the resting state, as well as the anticipation and recovery conditions. Results showed significantly more AAC in LSA than HSA participants during early anticipation, as well as significant values during all conditions in LSA participants only. PAC did not distinguish between LSA and HSA participants, and instead was found to correlate with state nervousness during early anticipation, but in LSA participants only. Together, these findings are interpreted to suggest that delta-beta AAC is a plausible neurobiological index of adaptive stress regulation and can distinguish between trait high and low social anxiety during stress, while delta-beta PAC might be sensitive enough to reflect mild state anxiety in LSA participants.Pathways through Adolescenc