Each stimulus was presented for ms, with the mean inter-stimulus intervals ISI being ms randomly between and ms. The hand to press button was counterbalanced across the participants. During the experiment, participants were instructed to watch the center of the screen, relax, and minimize eye blinks or body movements. Based on the present aim, EEG signals were continuously recorded band pass 0. VEOG and HEOG were recorded with two pairs of electrodes, one placed above and below right eye, and the other 10 mm from the lateral canthi.
We used EMSE 5. EEG data were re-referenced to the bi-mastoid average reference. EOG artifacts were corrected offline. The EEG was segmented into the epoch from ms pre-stimulus to ms post-stimulus. The EEG segments were averaged separately for target and standard stimuli. The number of average trials left after removal of the artifacts was Nogo and Go for low and Nogo and Go for high trait anger, respectively.
Behavioral results RT and accuracy were compared by t -test to explore the group difference between high and low trait anger groups. For ERPs data, according to the frontal-central scalp distribution of N2nogo and P3nogo components, we focused on the analysis at frontal-central electrode sites Fz, FCz, Cz. The N2 component was quantified as the most negative amplitude within a to ms window following stimulus onset. The P3 component was quantified as the most positive amplitude within to ms following the N2 peak.
The Geisser—Greenhouse correction was used for any repeated measures containing more than one degree of freedom in the numerator Geisser and Greenhouse, The accuracy did not differ between two groups Figure 1 illustrates the grand averages for the Go and Nogo stimuli in the high and low trait anger groups, respectively.
Figure 1. Grand average waveforms elicited by Go and Nogo stimuli in low and high trait anger groups, respectively. Post-hoc analysis indicated that the P3 elicited by Go stimuli was significantly reduced in low 7. Figure 2. The difference waveforms between Nogo and Go ERPs in low and high trait anger groups, respectively, as well as the 2D scalp distribution topography of the peak amplitudes of N2 and P3 components.
The main aim of the present study was to investigate the effects of the trait anger on response inhibition. Across groups, the nogo stimuli elicited larger N2 and P3 components than did the go stimuli. Although the nogo effect of N2 was similar between low and high trait anger groups, the P3 elicited by Go stimuli was larger in high than low trait anger groups and the P3nogo did not differ between two groups. This induced smaller P3d component in high over low trait anger groups. Consistent with the present RT data, Parrott et al reported that high levels of trait anger displayed facilitative biases in the processing of semantic anger-related stimuli Parrott et al.
However, this effect was not found widely Wenzel and Lystad, The present experiment presented a simple triangle shape without any emotional information, which would not change the state anger of participants.
Consistent with previous studies, greater N2 amplitudes were observed in Nogo than in Go trials, regardless of the trait anger. There was evidence that the N2nogo amplitude is a valuable indicator for the measurement of response conflict. The present fact that the N2nogo as well as N2d did not differ between high and low angry persons indicated that the response conflict especially the detection of conflict information is not modulated by the trait anger.
Although there was evidence that the P3nogo component may not necessarily represent inhibition of a response Falkenstein et al. The reduced P3d amplitudes in the present high trait anger group indicated the impaired response inhibition.
Supporting this view, one recent report showed that the anger group had more false alarms overall, indicating impaired response inhibition Jaworska et al. In addition, the increased right cortical activation during the initial portion of CPT existed in the anger group, perhaps reflecting greater engagement of frontal circuits i.
It should be noted here that the reduced Pd3 in high trait anger group is indeed due to the decreased P3go in low trait anger group. In line with recent reports Shucard et al. Generally, the hyper-arousal plays the primary role in producing an enhanced P3 to Go stimuli, and the high score individuals cannot mobilize more inhibitory resources on Nogo stimuli.
Our behavioral findings of faster response to Go stimuli in the high trait anger group supported this hypothesis as well. It is reasonable that, in the cognitive processes from stimuli to response, high trait anger individuals have an inferior inhibitory control and then make a quick emotional response.
While, the nogo effect of N2 related to conflict monitoring was similar between two groups, the nogo effect of P3 closely related to the actual inhibition of the motor system was smaller in high than that in low trait anger group.
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. It distinguishes between the three modes of anger expression: anger-out, anger-in, and anger-control. Anger-out refers to a tendency to express anger through either verbal or physical behaviors. Anger-in or suppressed anger refers to the tendency to hold one's anger on the inside without any outlet.
Anger-control refers to the tendency to engage in behaviors intended to reduce overt anger expression Spielberger, We recorded the trait anger scale in the present study. Spielberger et al. Baron, K. Hostility, anger, and marital adjustment: concurrent and prospective associations with psychosocial vulnerability. Bettencourt, B. Personality and aggressive behavior under provoking and neutral conditions: a meta-analytic review. Bokura, H.
Daniel, S. Trait anger, anger expression, and suicide attempts among adolescents and young adults: a prospective study. Deffenbacher, J.
Anger, aggression, and risky behavior: a comparison of high and low anger drivers. Dimoska, A. Psychiatry 54, — Distel, M. The covariation of trait anger and borderline personality: a bivariate twin-siblings study. Falkenstein, M. Acta Psychol. Fallgatter, A. The NoGo-anteriorization as a neurophysiological standard-index for cognitive response control.
Forgays, D. Fulwiler, C. Amygdala-orbitofrontal resting-state functional connectivity is associated with trait anger. Neuroreport 23, — Gagne, J. A longitudinal analysis of anger and inhibitory control in twins from 12 to 36 months of age. Effects of cue information on response production and inhibition measured by event-related potentials. Acta Physiol. Geisser, S. An extension of Box's results on the use of the F distribution in multivariate analysis.
Jaworska, N. A pilot study of electrocortical activity in dysfunctional anger: decreased frontocortical activation, impaired attention control, and diminished behavioral inhibition. Kok, A. How to cite. Synonyms Hostile affect ; Hostility. This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access. Neuroendocrine and behavioral mechanisms mediating the relationship between anger expression and cardiovascular risk: Assessment consideration and improvements.
Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 29 , — Barefoot, J. The cook-medley hostility scale: Item content and ability to predict survival. Psychosomatic Medicine, 51 , 46— PubMed Google Scholar. Buss, A. The psychology of aggression. New York: Wiley. CrossRef Google Scholar. Carroll, J. Negative affective responses to a speech task predict changes in interleukin IL Brain, Behavior, and Immunity, 25 , — A urinary marker of oxidative stress covaries positively with hostility among midlife community volunteers.
Psychosomatic Medicine, 72 3 , — Chida, Y. The association of anger and hostility with future coronary heart disease: A meta-analytic review of prospective evidence. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 53 11 , — Everson, S. Hostility and increased risk of mortality and acute myocardial infarction: The mediating role of behavioral risk factors.
American Journal of Epidemiology, 2 , — Greeson, J. Stress-induced changes in the expression of monocytic beta2-integrins: The impact of arousal of negative affect and adrenergic responses to the anger recall interview. Brain, Behavior, and Immunity, 23 2 , — Martinn R. A three-factor model of trait anger: dimensions of affect, behavior, and cognition. Journal of Personality , 68 , — Miller, T. A meta-analytic review of research on hostility and physical health.
0コメント