Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2013 Mar 7:7:69.
doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00069. eCollection 2013.

The impact of induced anxiety on response inhibition

Affiliations

The impact of induced anxiety on response inhibition

Oliver J Robinson et al. Front Hum Neurosci. .

Abstract

Anxiety has wide reaching effects on cognition; evidenced most prominently by the "difficulties concentrating" seen in anxiety disorders, and by adaptive harm-avoidant behaviors adopted under threatening circumstances. Despite having critical implications for daily-living, the precise impact of anxiety on cognition is as yet poorly quantified. Here we attempt to clarify the impact of anxiety on sustained attention and response inhibition via a translational anxiety induction in healthy individuals (N = 22). Specifically, in a within-subjects design, participants completed the Sustained Attention to Response Task (SART) in which subjects withhold responses to infrequent no-go stimuli under threat of unpredictable electrical shock (anxious) and safe (non-anxious) conditions. Different studies have argued that this task measures either (1) attention lapses due to off-task thinking or (2) response inhibition; two cognitive functions which are likely impacted by anxiety. We show that threat of shock significantly reduces errors of commission on the no-go trials relative to the safe condition whilst having no effect on go trials or overall reaction time (RT). We suggest that this is because threat of shock during SART promotes response inhibition. In particular we argue that, by virtue of frequency, subjects acquire a habitual bias toward a go response which impairs no-go performance and that threat of shock improves the ability to withhold these prepotent responses. This improved response inhibition likely falls within the range of adaptive cognitive functions which promote cautious harm avoidance under threatening conditions, although a range of alternative explanations for this effect is discussed.

Keywords: anxiety; mind-wandering; response inhibition; threat; threat of shock.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Response Accuracy; threat of shock significantly improved no-go accuracy (*p < 0.05), while having no effect upon go accuracy (NS = not significant), error bars represent standard error of the mean.

References

    1. Agnew N., Agnew M. (1963). Drive level effects on tasks of narrow and broad attention. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. A 15, 58–62
    1. Algom D. (2004). A rational look at the emotional stroop phenomenon: a generic slowdown, not a stroop effect. J. Exp. Psychol Gen. 133, 323–338 10.1037/0096-3445.133.3.323 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Aron A. R. (2011). From reactive to proactive and selective control: developing a richer model for stopping inappropriate responses. Biol. Psychiatry 69, e55–e68 10.1016/j.biopsych.2010.07.024 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Baas J. M. P., Milstein J., Donlevy M., Grillon C. (2006). Brainstem correlates of defensive states in humans. Biol. Psychiatry 59, 588–593 10.1016/j.biopsych.2005.09.009 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bishop S. J. (2009). Trait anxiety and impoverished prefrontal control of attention. Nat. Neurosci. 12, 92–98 10.1038/nn.2242 - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources