Cortisol responses enhance negative valence perception for ambiguous facial expressions

Abstract

Stress exposure elicits a prolonged neuroendocrine response, marked by cortisol release, which can influence important forms of affective decision-making. Identifying how stress reactivity shapes subjective biases in decisions about emotional ambiguity (i.e., valence bias) provides insight into the role stress plays in basic affective processing for healthy and clinical populations alike. Here, we sought to examine how stress reactivity affects valence decisions about emotional ambiguity. Given that stress prioritizes automatic emotional processing which, in the context of valence bias, is associated with increased negativity, we tested how individual differences in acute stress responses influence valence bias and how this decision process evolves over time. Participants provided baseline ratings of clear (happy, angry) and ambiguous (surprised) facial expressions, then re-rated similar stimuli after undergoing an acute stress or control manipulation a week later; salivary cortisol was measured throughout to assay stress reactivity. Elevations in cortisol were associated with more negative ratings of surprised faces, and with more direct response trajectories toward negative ratings (i.e., less response competition). These effects were selectively driven by the stress group, evidencing that increased stress reactivity is associated with a stronger negativity bias during ambiguous affective decision-making.

Divergent effects of brief contemplative practices in response to an acute stressor: A randomized controlled trial of brief breath awareness, loving-kindness, gratitude or an attention control practice

“…Strategies that promote adaptive stress regulation are important because stress degrades top-down regulatory processes, promotes negative affect, and biases behaviors [11]. For example, stress and negative affect bias first impressions [12] and lead to lower likability ratings of emotionally ambiguous faces [13]. Individual experiences of stress, as opposed to stress experienced collectively as part of a group, attenuate generous behaviors [14].…”

Hormonal and emotional responses to competition using a dyadic approach: Basal testosterone predicts emotional state after a defeat

“…For example, the administration of exogenous T was related to reduced skin conductance responses, as well as reduced affective startle modulation, in anxiety-prone participants during the display of negative stimuli (Hermans et al, 2007). In addition, higher C levels were associated with a propensity to a negative valence perception for ambiguous stimuli (Brown, Raio, & Neta, 2017). The third dimension proposed by Russell and Mehrabian was 'dominance', which refers to the sensation of control, understood as the perception of being dominant or submissive, controlling or being controlled in a specific situation.…”

Positivity effect in aging: Evidence for the primacy of positive responses to emotional ambiguity

“…Among the recruited participants, 3 younger adults and 1 older adult failed to accurately rate clearly valenced facial expressions on at least 60% of the trials and thus were excluded from further analysis. This accuracy threshold has been used previously in young adult populations (Brown et al, 2017;Neta et al, 2009;Neta and Tong, 2016), and is a particularly important exclusionary criteria given the difficulty in discerning the specific interpretations of dual-valence ambiguity (i.e., valence bias) if stimuli with clear valence are not accurately rated. As such, 54 young (26 female, ages 17-30 years, mean(SD) age = 20.83(2.98)) and 51 older adults (36 female, ages 60-88 years, mean(SD) age = 69.94(6.90)) were included in the analysis of behavioral data.…”

“…The goal of the present work is to explore the behavioral and neural mechanisms of the positive valence bias in older adults (compared to younger adults). Although some behavioral work in young adults has lent support for an initial negativity (e.g., longer reaction times for positive than negative trials, an initial attraction to the competing -negative -response when rating as positive; Brown et al, 2017;Neta et al, 2009), these approaches may be less compelling in aging. For example, behavioral responses such as reaction time and other motor responses show a general slowing in older age (Proctor et al, 2005).…”