Disruption of working memory and contralateral delay activity by nociceptive stimuli is modulated by task demands

Abstract

Top-down processes allow the selection and prioritization of information by limiting attentional capture by distractors, and these mechanisms depend on task demands such as working memory (WM) load. However, bottom-up processes give salient stimuli a stronger neuronal representation and provoke attentional capture. The aim of this study was to examine the effect of salient nociceptive stimuli on WM while manipulating task demands. Twenty-one healthy participants performed a change detection task during which they had to determine whether 2 successive visual arrays were different or the same. Task demands were modulated by manipulating the WM load (set size included 2 or 4 objects to recall) and by the correspondence between the 2 successive visual arrays (change vs no change). Innocuous stimuli (control) or nociceptive stimuli (distractors) were delivered during the delay period between the 2 visual arrays. Contralateral delay activity and laser-evoked potentials were recorded to examine neural markers of visual WM and nociceptive processes. Nociceptive stimuli decreased WM performance depending on task demands (all P , 0.05). Moreover, compared with control stimuli, nociceptive stimuli abolished the increase in contralateral delay activity amplitude for set size 4 vs set size 2 (P 5 0.04). Consistent with these results, laser-evoked potential amplitude was not decreased when task demands were high (P 5 0.5). These findings indicate that WM may shield cognition from nociceptive stimuli, but nociceptive stimuli disrupt WM and alter task performance when cognitive resources become insufficient to process all task-relevant information.

The effect of high versus low cognitive load on the development of nociceptive hypersensitivity: The roles of sympathetic arousal, sex and pain‐related fear

“…Third, it is possible that the design is not optimal to disclose difference in the power of steady-state evoked potentials. We only had a 2-min recording of steady-state evoked potentials during painful stimulation, in contrast with classical studies using several repetitions of the stimuli (Wagenaar-Tison et al, 2021). Moreover, to the best of our knowledge, all other studies combining EEG and nociceptive stimulation used a number of discrete nociceptive stimuli (e.g.…”

“…Research has shown that performing a cognitive task during acute nociceptive stimulation attenuates pain perception (Petrovic et al, 2000; Romero et al, 2013; Valet et al, 2004; Verhoeven et al, 2011). Indeed, cognitive load (Bantick et al, 2002; Deldar et al, 2021; Legrain et al, 2005; Moore et al, 2017; Seminowicz et al, 2007; Veldhuijzen et al, 2006; Wagenaar‐Tison et al, 2021; Wiech et al, 2005) and working memory (Buhle & Wager, 2010; Deldar et al, 2018, 2019; Do et al, 2020; Legrain et al, 2013; Legrain, Crombez, & Mouraux, 2011; Legrain, Crombez, Verhoeven, et al, 2011) may contribute to pain reduction, by shielding attention from the nociceptive input. This would be in line with limited‐capacity theories of attention (Broadbent, 1958; Kahneman, 1975; Lavie et al, 2004; Norman & Bobrow, 1975): The more attentional resources performing a cognitive task requires; the less resources remain available to process concomitant nociceptive stimuli.…”

The Effect of High Versus Low Cognitive Load on the Development of Nociceptive Hypersensitivity: The Roles of Sympathetic Arousal, Sex, and Pain-Related Fear

“…Third, it is possible that the design is not optimal to disclose difference in the power of steady-state evoked potentials. We only had a 2-minute recording of steady-state evoked potentials during painful stimulation, in contrast with classical studies using several repetitions of the stimuli (Wagenaar-Tison et al, 2021). Moreover, to the best of our knowledge, all other studies combining EEG and nociceptive stimulation used a number of discrete nociceptive stimuli (e.g.…”

“…Research has shown that performing a cognitive task during acute nociceptive stimulation attenuates pain perception (Petrovic et al, 2000;Romero et al, 2013;Valet et al, 2004;Verhoeven et al, 2011). Indeed, cognitive load (Bantick et al, 2002;Deldar et al, 2021;Legrain et al, 2005;Moore et al, 2017;Seminowicz et al, 2007;Veldhuijzen et al, 2006;Wagenaar-Tison et al, 2021;Wiech et al, 2005) and working memory (Buhle & Wager, 2010;Deldar et al, 2018;2019;Do et al, 2020;Legrain et al, 2011a;2011b; may contribute to pain reduction, by shielding attention from the nociceptive input. This would be in line with limited-capacity theories of attention (Broadbent, 1958;Kahneman, 1975;Lavie et al, 2004;Norman & Bobrow, 1975): The more attentional resources performing a cognitive task requires, the less resources remain available to process concomitant nociceptive stimuli.…”