Impact of state anxiety on the interaction between threat monitoring and cognition

Abstract

How does threat processing impact cognitive performance? To investigate this question, in the present functional magnetic resonance imaging study, participants performed a response-conflict task (neutral, congruent, and incongruent trials) that followed a variable-length shock anticipation period or a corresponding delay during which they would not be shocked. The delay period was cued by a geometric-shaped stimulus indicating whether the subject was in the safe (no shock) or threat (potential shock) condition. Behaviorally, participants showed increased reaction time interference (incongruent – neutral) during threat trials, an effect that increased as a function of state anxiety level across participants. Brain imaging data were analyzed for the cue and the subsequent target phase of the task. At the target phase, the left anterior insula exhibited interaction-type responses (i.e., increased interference during threat trials) that were positively associated with state anxiety level – a relationship that paralleled the behavioral pattern. At the cue phase, greater responses to threat vs. safe were observed in a circuit of regions, including the medial PFC, anterior insula, thalamus, and bed nucleus of the stria terminalis/caudate, which we interpreted as engaged by shock monitoring/anticipation processes. In contrast, intriguingly, greater responses to safe vs. threat at the cue phase were observed in a broader set of regions that overlapped with the “resting-state” network. Finally, a standard statistical mediation analysis revealed that the relationship between state anxiety scores and interference-related responses in the left anterior insula during the target phase was partially mediated via cue responses in the medial PFC, consistent with the idea that more anxious individuals had difficulty in engaging the medial PFC during the threat condition. Taken together, our findings suggest that threat monitoring impairs the upcoming resolution of interference. Furthermore, a confluence of effects of cognitive task condition, threat, and individual differences in state anxiety was observed in the anterior insula, a structure that is suggested to be particularly important for the interaction between emotion and cognition.

Involvement of amygdala–prefrontal dysfunction in the influence of negative emotion on the resolution of cognitive conflict in patients with schizophrenia

“…The behavioral finding that patients’ correct response rate was equal to controls may reflect this lack of difference in PFC or ACC activity. State anxiety impacts the interaction between emotion and cognition via the anterior insula (Choi, Padmala, & Pessoa, 2012), but an abnormal response in this region was not observed in our patients. Instead, patients showed reduced activity in the bilateral angular gyri and right fusiform gyrus while performing the emotional Simon task.…”

The Human BNST: Functional Role in Anxiety and Addiction

“…The previously described study (Alvarez et al, 2011) confirmed that long-duration contexts can engage the BNST; however, two other studies have shown BNST activity in response to much shorter anticipation periods. Choi et al (2012) found elevated BNST activity and skin conductance response during a short 1.75-5.75 s threat context. In another study, Klumpers et al (2014) found greater BNST activity to threat (relative to safe cues) using a 4-s shock anticipation period.…”

Electrical neuroimaging reveals content-specific effects of threat in primary visual cortex and fronto-parietal attentional networks

“…However, based on existing dissociations in the literature (e.g., peripheral distractor processing seems to be either decreased or increased under stress depending on situational factors, see Choi et al, 2012 andSchmitz et al, 2009), we predicted that the two types of strains (physical vs. psychosocial) would have dissociable effects on attention control at the electrophysiological level. Hypervigilance and reduced goal-directed processing were hypothesized to be related to the threat of bodily harm, selectively (Choi et al, 2012;Moser et al, 2005;Shackman et al, 2011).…”

“…Unlike bodily harm, these psychosocial strains have been suggested to narrow the attentional scope, resulting in decreased early visual responses to irrelevant sensory information (Easterbrook, 1959;Rossi and Pourtois 2012a;Schmitz et al, 2009), without systematically affecting goal-directed behavior. By comparison, sustained anxiety related to the anticipation of uncontrollable physical harm seems mainly to impair attentional control functions, in favor of a bottom-up (ventral) attentional system, which might mediate hypervigilance (thus, enhanced responses to task-irrelevant, but potentially threatening information, see also Bishop et al, 2004;Choi et al, 2012;Cornwell et al, 2011;Pourtois et al, 2013).…”

“…Hypervigilance and reduced goal-directed processing were hypothesized to be related to the threat of bodily harm, selectively (Choi et al, 2012;Moser et al, 2005;Shackman et al, 2011). Sensory hypervigilance would primarily be translated in maintained or increased early responses to irrelevant information in V1 (C1 component, Weymar et al, 2013) accompanied by 7 an attenuation of goal-directed processing as measured in amplitude of the target-locked P300 (Moser et al, 2005;Shackman et al, 2011).…”