"Setting up a poster in Powerpoint using this template"
Cardiovascular and Electroencephalographic Indicators of Anger and Control/No Control States Elena Spiridon & Stephen H. Fairclough Liverpool John Moores University, UK 1. I N T R O D U C T I O N 3.3. E lectroencephalic results Within the realm of cardiovascular research the debate surrounds the 2.1. Self-report measures The power in the alpha bandwidth at the frontal peripheral (FP) site challenge/threat appraisal model proposed by Blascovich & Tomaka (1996); in State anger (STAXI 2; Spielberger, 1999) decreased significantly during the task (relative to the baseline) regardless of that challenge is linked to a sympathetic-adrenomedullary (SAM) response - Perceived control (Matthews & Desmond, 1998) condition (F (2,64) = 10.02, p < .001, η2 = .24); Figure 4. increased heart rate (HR), cardiac output (CO), left ventricular ejection time 2.2. Cardiovascular measures (LVET) and reduced total peripheral resistance (TPR) - whilst threat reflects a Blood Pressure (BP) A nger/Control A nger/No control Neutral/Control Neutral/No control pituitary-adrenocortical response (PAC). The challenge/threat dichotomy has been C O = SV x H R 0 Approach supported by research that measured hormone levels as an indication of perceived SV (Sramek-Bernstain) = v E P T/Z 0 x dz/dt (max) x LV E T -0.02 Differences in alpha power (Hz) control (Lavatallo et al ., 1986). However, Stemmler et al. (2007) attempted a H R = R- R -0.04 division between fear/withdrawal from goals (noradrenergic response) and anger- T PR = [Mean A rterial Pressure (M A P) × 80] / C O Ln R- LnL -0.06 approach towards goals (adrenergic response). This model of blended 2.3. E lectroencephalic measures -0.08 emotion/motivation was scrutinised by Harmon-Jones’ work (2004) on frontal Reference: Linked- ears montage. Avoidance brain asymmetry, which indexed a single negative emotional category (anger) in A nalysis: Average Fast Fourier Transformer (2 sec). -0.1 combination with a binary motivational context – Left brain hemisphere (LH) for Measure: Amplitude values; alpha band (8.2-12.9 Hz). -0.12 anger/approach; and right hemisphere (RH) for anger/avoidance. However, a C alculation: Ln (right) – Ln (left) alpha values at frontal brain -0.14 p < .03 complete cardiovascular and electroencephalic model of anger and motivational sites (FP2-FP1, F4-F3, AF4-AF3, FC2-FC1) Experimental condition directions has yet to be agreed upon. F igure 4: M ean L n differences between baseline and test at the F P site (N= 39) 2. M E T H O D 3. R ESU LTS 4. D ISC USSI O N Forty one right-handed healthy and with low trait anger participants (Figure 1) 3.1. Self-report results Systolic BP responded to anger/no control, but not to the absence of control in the (17 males; age = 27.18 ± 8.91 years and 24 females; 24.79 ± 7.15 years) were Anger manipulation was successful (F(1,37) = 10.88, p < .001). The neutral affective state underlining a possible heightening of SAM activity by the allocated to four experimental groups: anger/control (AC); anger/no control effect of control was also significant (F(3,37) = 36.59, p < .001). combination of anger and the absence of control. The SAM pattern observed for (ANC), neutral/control (NC) and neutral/no control (NNC). Bonferroni pairwise comparisons revealed that anger state increased the BP was mirrored by the cardiac parameters (CO, LVET and TPR), however significantly (ps < .02) in the anger conditions, while perception of the impedance data failed to significantly discriminate between groups control decreased significantly in the no control conditions (ps < .001); contradicting Blascovich &Tomaka (1996)’s model. The FP site showed the Table 1; expected right brain activation in the anger/no control condition (Harmon-Jones’s (2004) model), indicating an avoidance motivation. Considering that systolic BP 3.2. C ardiovascular responses was also sensitive to the latter condition, it can be assumed that affect and D IN A M A P = BP; M A P APPARATUS The results associated with BP showed significant differences in systolic motivation interact with each other intensifying biological reaction. However, it BP between baseline and test (F(1,37) = 21.25, p < .01); Figure 3. The remains unclear whether affect enhances motivational disposition or motivational interaction was also significant (F(3,37) = 3.35, p < .05). Bonferroni- disposition deepens the experience of a negative emotion. corrected post-hoc t-tests (p < .02) showed that systolic BP increased significantly only in the anger/no control condition (p < .01) compared to B I OSE M I=32 E E G N I C O 100C = Zo; dz/dt 0.1Hz - 35Hz baseline. 5. A cknowledgements 50Hz; 5ohms/volts The work was founded by the European Commission within the 7th Framework B I O PA C T E L100C = H R 122 Systolic BP baseline Programme (FP7) as part of the REFLECT project. 0.5Hz - 35HZ Systolic BP test 120 F igure 1: T he experimental set up 118 References Pressure (mm Hg) 116 Blascovich, J. & Tomaka, J. (1996). The biopsychosocial model of arousal regulation. In M.P. Zanna (Ed.). Anger (anger state vs. neutral state) was manipulated by aired 114 Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 29: 1-51. New York: Academy Press. an intercom messages from a fictional experimenter who was 112 Harmon-Jones, E. (2004). On the relationship of anterior brain activity and anger: examining the role of either rude or polite (Stemmler et al., 2007). A computerized attitude toward anger. Cognition and E motion, 18, 337–361. 110 Lovallo, W.R., Pincomb, G.A. & Wilson, M.F. (1986). Predicting response to a reaction time task: heart version of the number STROOP task (Figure 2) provided the 108 rate reactivity compared with type A behaviour. Psychophysiology, 23, 648– 656. bases for manipulating the control vs no control states; 106 Matthews, G. & Desmond, P.A. (1998). Personality and multiple dimensions of task-induced fatigue: a specifically, the computer either worked correctly (control) or it AC ANC NC NNC study of simulated driving. Personality and Individual Differences, 25, 443-458. Spielberger, C.D. (1999). Manual for the State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory-2. Odessa, F L: generated erroneous feedback and the keyboard was E xperimental condition Psychological Assessment Resources. malfunctioning (no control). Stemmler, G., Aue, T. & Wacker, J. (2007). Anger and fear: separable effects of emotion and motivational direction on somatovisceral responses. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 66, 141-153. * F igure 3: Systolic blood pressure across experimental group (Total N = 41). 666666 Descriptive statistics of cardiological measures showed CO increase, F urther information higher LVET and a decline in TPR in the control (approach) condition. email: E.Spiridon@2008.ljmu.ac.uk Suppressed cardiovascular activity was observed in the no-control web: http://reflect.first.fraunhofer.de Incor rect (avoidance) conditions. However, the differences between conditions did not reach statistical significance (ps > .05). F igure 2. Screenshots of the sequences of the Number Stroop task used in the study 49th A nnual M eeting, Berlin Society for Psychophysiological Research 21-24 O ctober, 2009