Evaluating correctly others' pain is a crucial prosocial ability, especially relevant for the healthcare system. In clinical settings, caregivers assess their patients' pain under high workload and fatigue, often while dealing with competing information/tasks. However, the effect played by such cognitive strain in the appraisal of others' pain remains unclear. Following embodied accounts that posit a shared representational code between self and others' states, it could be hypothesized that the representation of people's pain might be influenced by cognitive exertion similarly to first-hand experiences. Fifty participants underwent one of two demanding tasks, involving either working memory (Experiment 1: N-Back task) or cognitive interference (Experiment 2: Stroop task). After each task, participants were exposed to painful laser stimulations at three intensity levels (low, medium, high), or video-clips of patients experiencing three intensity levels of pain (low, medium, high). Participants rated the intensity of each pain event on a visual analogue scale. We found that the two tasks influenced rating of both one's own and others' pain, by decreasing the sensitivity to medium and high events. This was observed either when comparing the demanding condition to a control (Stroop), or when modelling linearly the difficulty/performance of each depleting task (N-Back). These effects were mirrored by the analysis of physiological responses (Heart Variability and Skin Conductance) evoked by one's own pain. We provide converging evidence that cognitive exertion affects the subsequent appraisal of one's own and likewise others' pain. Healthcare personnel should be aware that high workload might alter their cognitive abilities.
Whether and how sleep loss affects executive functioning are still under debate. In this study, we examined the role of individual differences in determining the levels of working memory (WM) efficiency and proactive interference (PI) after sleep deprivation. Fifty-two participants performed a test battery included a modified Sternberg task and the Jonides' 2-back task under two sleep conditions: baseline (BL, a night of regular sleep), and total sleep deprivation (SD, 24 h of wakefulness). In general, we replicated Tucker and colleagues' (2010) results. However, when we divided the subjects into two groups according to WM efficiency after SD, participants that showed a greater efficiency were more susceptible to PI, while those with lower WM efficiency showed a level of resistance to PI similar to BL. These results indicate that resistance to PI after SD is dependent on WM efficiency, highlighting the importance of individual differences in sleep deprivation studies.
Correctly evaluating others’ pain is a crucial prosocial ability. In both clinical and private settings, caregivers assess their other people’s pain, sometimes under the effect of poor sleep and high workload and fatigue. However, the effect played by such cognitive strain in the appraisal of others’ pain remains unclear. Fifty participants underwent one of two demanding tasks, involving either working memory (Experiment 1: N-Back task) or cognitive interference (Experiment 2: Stroop task). After each task, participants were exposed to painful laser stimulations at three intensity levels (low, medium, high), or video-clips of patients experiencing three intensity levels of pain (low, medium, high). Participants rated the intensity of each pain event on a visual analogue scale. We found that the two tasks influenced rating of both one’s own and others’ pain, by decreasing the sensitivity to medium and high events. This was observed either when comparing the demanding condition to a control (Stroop), or when modelling linearly the difficulty/performance of each depleting task (N-Back). We provide converging evidence that cognitive exertion affects the subsequent appraisal of one’s own and likewise others’ pain.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.