Neuropsychological effects of hostility and pain on emotion perception

Abstract

In order to examine the neuropsychological effects of hostility on emotional and pain processing, auditory emotion perception before and after cold pressor pain in high and low hostile men was examined. Additionally, quantitative electroencephalography (QEEG) was recorded between each experimental manipulation. Results indicated that identification of emotion post cold pressor differed as a function of hostility level and ear. Primary QEEG findings indicated increased left temporal activation after cold pressor exposure and increased reactivity to cold pressor pain in the high hostile group. Low hostile men had a bilateral increase in high beta magnitude at the temporal lobes and a bilateral increase in delta magnitude at the frontal lobes after the cold pressor. Taken together, results from the dichotic listening task and the QEEG suggest decreased cerebral laterality and left hemisphere activation for emotional and pain processing in high hostile men.

An extension of the functional cerebral systems approach to hostility: A capacity model utilizing a dual concurrent task paradigm

“…The observed inability to maintain stable measures of cerebral activation is an indication that high-hostile men are less able to regulate right hemisphere activation while managing cognitive and physiological stress. This finding of increased right cerebral activation in high-hostile men is consistent with previous research (Demaree, Higgins, Williamson, & Harrison, 2002;Harrison & Gorelczenko, 1990;Mitchell & Harrison, 2009). …”

“…The Hostility × Condition interaction that was found for the baseline (Condition 1) and pre physiological stress (Condition 4) conditions provided information on cerebral arousal with respect to hostility and the anticipation of physiological stress. Consistent with previous findings (Babiloni et al, 2005;Mitchell & Harrison, 2009), increased right cerebral activation was indicative of anticipation of painful stimuli. The second Hostility × Condition interaction ( Figure 5) that was found for baseline (Condition 1) and before the second administration of the second RFFT (Condition 6) provided information on cerebral arousal with respect to hostility and the anticipation of cognitive stress.…”

“…Briefly, this capacity model (Carmona, Holland, & Harrison, 2009;Foster, Drago, Ferguson, & Harrison, 2008;Mitchell & Harrison, 2009;Williamson & Harrison, 2003) states that physiological arousal is associated with negative emotional processing that is characteristic of high-hostile individuals. Changes in physiological arousal and emotional processing with high levels of hostility are related to decrements in right hemispheric perceptual processing and reduced right frontal regulatory control over stress Rhodes et al, 2002;.…”

Frontal lobe regulation of blood glucose levels: support for the limited capacity model in hostile violence-prone men

“…In addition, there are very few models of hostility that attempt to explain how these constructs are related. To address these concerns, The Limited Capacity Model of Hostility was proposed by Williamson and Harrison [21], Carmona et al [22], and Mitchell and Harrison [23]. Specifically, we have proposed a limitation in capacity of the right frontal lobe to regulate posterior and inferior cerebral systems under stress.…”

“…Moreover, hostile men have shown evidence for diminished capacity within right anterior cerebral regions, including motor [43] and premotor systems [21, 44–46]. Collectively, this approach has culminated in the Limited Capacity Model [21–23, 35, 46]. We proposed that anger regulation and concurrent regulatory control over sympathetic drive suffer in hostile, violent-prone men due to diminished capacity within right frontal systems.…”