Task engagement and the relationships between the error-related negativity, agreeableness, behavioral shame proneness and cortisol

Abstract

SummaryPrevious results suggest that both cortisol mobilization and the errorrelated negativity (ERN/Ne) reflect goal engagement, i.e. the mobilization and allocation of attentional and physiological resources. Personality measures of negative affectivity have been associated both to high cortisol levels and large ERN/Ne amplitudes. However, measures of positive social adaptation and agreeableness have also been related to high cortisol levels and large ERN/Ne amplitudes. We hypothesized that, as long as they relate to concerns over social evaluation and mistakes, both personality measures reflecting positive affectivity (e.g. agreeableness) and those reflecting negative affectivity (e.g. behavioral shame proneness) would be associated with an increased likelihood of high task engagement, and hence to increased cortisol mobilization and ERN/Ne amplitudes. We had female subjects perform a flanker task while EEG was recorded. Additionally, the subjects filled out questionnaires measuring mood and personality, and salivary cortisol immediately before and after task performance was measured. The overall pattern of relationships between our measures supports the hypothesis that cortisol mobilization and ERN/Ne amplitude reflect task engagement, and both relate positively to each other and to the personality traits agreeableness and behavioral shame proneness. We discuss the potential importance of engagement-disengagement and of concerns over social evaluation for research on psychopathology, stress and the ERN/Ne.

Absorbed in the task: Personality measures predict engagement during task performance as tracked by error negativity and asymmetrical frontal activity

“…Changes in the amplitude of the ERN to performance feedback have been related to changes in self-reported engagement during a task (Yeung, Holroyd, & Cohen, 2005). In previous studies, using a task that required continuous performance for a rather long period of time (2.5 h), we found that the amplitude of the ERN decreased during task performance (most dramatically within the first 30 min) but increased again after providing the subjects with an opportunity to win a monetary reward by performing well Tops et al, 2006). We suggested that this may reflect reduced intrinsic engagement while performing a monotonous (i.e., boring), fatiguing task, compensated by extrinsic engagement after the reward manipulation.…”

“…Several studies have associated measures of punishment sensitivity or negative affectivity such as BIS and neuroticism with larger ERN amplitudes (e.g., Boksem, Tops, et al, 2006;Hajcak et al, 2004;Luu et al, 2000;Pailing & Segalowitz, 2004;Tops et al, 2006). Agreeableness and its strong correlate empathetic concern (see note 1) have also been related to larger ERN amplitudes (Larson, Fair, Good, & Baldwin, 2010;Santesso & Segalowitz, 2009;Tops et al, 2006). Larson et al also found a positive association between ERN amplitudes and scores of empathetic fantasy, a measure of absorption.…”

“…Similarly, increased ERN amplitudes have been found in high-socialized individuals, and decreased ERN amplitudes in low-socialized individuals, both when errors were punished (Dikman & Allen, 2000;Potts, George, Martin, & Barratt, 2006) and without explicit punishment (Santesso & Segalowitz, 2009;Santesso et al, 2005). Several studies have associated measures of punishment sensitivity or negative affectivity such as BIS and neuroticism with larger ERN amplitudes (e.g., Boksem, Tops, et al, 2006;Hajcak et al, 2004;Luu et al, 2000;Pailing & Segalowitz, 2004;Tops et al, 2006). Agreeableness and its strong correlate empathetic concern (see note 1) have also been related to larger ERN amplitudes (Larson, Fair, Good, & Baldwin, 2010;Santesso & Segalowitz, 2009;Tops et al, 2006).…”

“…1 To reconcile this seeming contradiction, it has been suggested that the ERN reflects task engagement (Cavanagh & Allen, 2008;Luu et al, 2000;Tops et al, 2006) or concern with the outcome of events Hajcak, Moser, Yeung, & Simons, 2005;Santesso & Segalowitz, 2009). We defined engagement as the overt or covert allocation or focusing of attentional resources.…”

Salivary testosterone and cortisol are jointly related to pro-environmental behavior in men

“…For example, lower cortisol has been shown to be associated with disruptive behavior disorder in boys (Dorn et al, 2009), callousness in male adolescents (Loney, Butler, Lima, Counts, & Eckel, 2006), as well as aggressive behavior (Böhnke, Bertsch, Kruk, & Naumann, 2010;van der Meij et al, 2015) and psychopathic traits (Cima, Smeets, & Jelicic, 2008;Holi, Auvinen-Lintunen, Lindberg, Tani, & Virkkunen, 2006) in adults. With regard to prosocial and related behaviors, evidence is scarce but positive associations have been reported for cortisol and the personality trait agreeableness (Tops, Boksem, Wester, Lorist, & Meijman, 2006;Vickers, Hervig, Poth, & Hackney, 1995), social affiliative behavior in children (Tennes, Kreye, Avitable, & Wells, 1986), quality of social relationships in adolescent girls (Booth, Granger, & Shirtcliff, 2008), and relationship functioning in mothers (Adam & Gunnar, 2001). …”