Uncertainty increases neural indices of attention in obsessive-compulsive disorder

Dieterich, Raoul; Endraß, Tanja; Kathmann, Norbert

doi:10.1002/da.22655

Cited by 18 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Sussman et al's (2017) functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study showed that cues indicating upcoming threat increased amygdala activity (a brain region associated with emotional attention) for subsequently presented threat faces. Moreover, studies on uncertainty have shown that attention towards the event, particularly the emotional event, is altered by cue uncertainty due to worry and anxiety, motivation and biased expectancies of negative consequences (e.g., Nitschke, 2011, 2013;Dieterich et al, 2016Dieterich et al, , 2017; for a review, Anselme, 2010). In line with those studies, Sarinopoulos et al (2010) showed stronger amygdala responses to uncertainty compared to certain negative events.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 77%

“…Some of these emotional and non-emotional cues signify upcoming events with certainty (i.e., they are certain cues), whereas others do not (i.e., they are uncertain cues). The different categories of cues might critically influence the perception of emotional consequences and even guide decision-making associated with those consequences (e.g., Onoda et al, 2006Onoda et al, , 2007Onoda et al, , 2008Sarinopoulos et al, 2010;Grupe and Nitschke, 2011;Gole et al, 2012;Lin et al, 2012Lin et al, , 2014aLin et al, ,b, 2015aLin et al, ,d, 2017bLin et al, , 2018Yang et al, 2012;Aue et al, 2013;Dieterich et al, 2016Dieterich et al, , 2017Sussman et al, 2017;Qiao et al, 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Laboratory studies often use a cue-event paradigm to manipulate different categories of cues (e.g., Onoda et al, 2006Onoda et al, , 2007Onoda et al, , 2008Sarinopoulos et al, 2010;Grupe and Nitschke, 2011;Staudinger et al, 2011;Gole et al, 2012;Lin et al, 2012Lin et al, , 2014aLin et al, ,b, 2015aLin et al, ,d, 2017bLin et al, , 2018Yang et al, 2012;Aue et al, 2013;Gruber et al, 2013;Galli et al, 2014;Dieterich et al, 2016Dieterich et al, , 2017Qiao et al, 2018). In this paradigm, expectancy cues are presented before emotional events.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Using the abovementioned ERPs, several studies have shown the effects of cue uncertainty on negative events when the emotional consequence is indicated by non-emotional cues. Note that there are studies regarding both explicit expectations (Dieterich et al, 2016(Dieterich et al, , 2017Lin et al, 2018;Qiao et al, 2018) and implicit expectations (Gole et al, 2012;Yang et al, 2012;Lin et al, 2015aLin et al, , 2017bLin et al, , 2018. Because the present study investigates the effect of cue uncertainty only in the context of implicit expectations, we only introduce the following related studies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Cue Valence Influences the Effects of Cue Uncertainty on ERP Responses to Emotional Events

Lin

Liang

Liu

et al. 2020

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Individuals often predict consequences, particularly emotional consequences, according to emotional or non-emotional signals conveyed by environmental cues (i.e., emotional and non-emotional cues, respectively). Some of these cues signify the consequences with certainty (i.e., certain cues), whereas others do not (i.e., uncertain cues). Several event-related potential (ERP) studies regarding non-emotional cues have suggested that the effects of cue uncertainty on attention to emotional events occur in both perception and evaluation processes. However, due to the limitations of previous studies, it is unclear what the effects of cue uncertainty would be in an emotional cue condition. Moreover, it is uncertain whether the effects of cue uncertainty are affected by cue valence (i.e., emotional and non-emotional cues). To address these questions, we asked participants to view cues and then to view emotional (positive or negative) pictures. The cues either did or did not indicate the emotional content of the picture. In the emotional cue condition, happy and fearful faces were used as certain cues indicating upcoming positive and negative pictures, respectively, and neutral faces were used as uncertain cues. In the non-emotional cue condition, scrambled faces outlined in red and blue indicated upcoming positive and negative pictures, respectively, and scrambled faces outlined in green served as uncertain cues. The results showed that for negative pictures, ERP responses in a time range between 60 and 1,000 ms were shifted to a more negative direction in a certain condition than in the uncertain condition when the cues were emotional. However, the effect was the reverse for positive pictures. This effect of cue uncertainty was similar in the non-emotional cue-negative condition. In contrast, there was no effect of cue uncertainty in the non-emotional cue-positive condition. Therefore, the findings indicate that cue uncertainty modulates attention toward emotional events when the events are signified by emotional cues. The findings may also suggest that cue valence modulates the effects of cue uncertainty on attention to emotional events.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 77%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Cue Valence Influences the Effects of Cue Uncertainty on ERP Responses to Emotional Events

Lin

Liang

Liu

et al. 2020

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the human literature, substantial research has supported the notion that individual differences in the sensitivity to cues may also confer risk for anxiety disorders (Bar-Haim, Lamy, Pergamin, Bakermans-Kranenburg, & van IJzendoorn, 2007;Heeren, Peschard, & Philippot, 2011;Mogg & Bradley, 2018;Shackman et al, 2016;Van Bockstaele et al, 2014). However, the majority of this work has examined abnormalities in neural, cognitive, and behavioral reactivity towards threat cues versus neutral cues, or compared to healthy control populations (e.g., Dieterich, Endrass, & Kathmann, 2017). Within this line of work, uncertainty has emerged as an important moderator of this observed individual difference in sensitivity to threat cues, with individuals with anxiety disorders demonstrating enhanced reactivity to uncertain compared to certain threat cues (Bradford, Kaye, & Curtin, 2014a;Bradford, Magruder, Korhumel, & Curtin, 2014b;Grupe & Nitschke, 2013).…”

Section: Cue Sensitivity and Sensitization By Stressmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior

Hellberg

Russell

Robinson

2018

Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gambling disorder is an impairing condition confounded by psychiatric co-morbidity, particularly with substance use and anxiety disorders. Yet, our knowledge of the mechanisms that cause these disorders to coalesce remains limited. The Incentive Sensitization Theory suggests that sensitization of neural Bwanting^pathways, which attribute incentive salience to rewards and their cues, is responsible for the excessive desire for drugs and cue-triggered craving. The resulting hyper-reactivity of the Bwanting' system is believed to heavily influence compulsive drug use and relapse. Notably, evidence for sensitization of the mesolimbic dopamine pathway has been seen across gambling and substance use, as well as anxiety and stress-related pathology, with stress playing a major role in relapse. Together, this evidence highlights a phenomenon known as cross-sensitization, whereby sensitization to stress, drugs, or gambling behaviors enhance the sensitivity and dopaminergic response to any of those stimuli. Here, we review the literature on how cue attraction and reward uncertainty may underlie gambling pathology, and examine how this framework may advance our understanding of co-mordidity with substance-use disorders (e.g., alcohol, nicotine) and anxiety disorders. We argue that reward uncertainty, as seen in slot machines and games of chance, increases dopaminergic activity in the mesolimbic pathway and enhances the incentive value of reward cues. We propose that incentive sensitization by reward uncertainty may interact with and predispose individuals to drug abuse and stress, creating a mechanism through which co-mordidity of these disorders may emerge.

show abstract

Electroencephalographic Correlates of Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder

Souza

2021

The Neurobiology and Treatment of OCD: Accelerating Progress

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Uncertainty increases neural indices of attention in obsessive-compulsive disorder

Cited by 18 publications

References 44 publications

Cue Valence Influences the Effects of Cue Uncertainty on ERP Responses to Emotional Events

Cue Valence Influences the Effects of Cue Uncertainty on ERP Responses to Emotional Events

Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior

Electroencephalographic Correlates of Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About