Cargando…

Social exclusion modulates priorities of attention allocation in cognitive control

Many studies have investigated how exclusion affects cognitive control and have reported inconsistent results. However, these studies usually treated cognitive control as a unitary concept, whereas it actually involved two main sub-processes: conflict detection and response implementation. Furthermo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Xu, Mengsi, Li, Zhiai, Diao, Liuting, Zhang, Lijie, Yuan, Jiajin, Ding, Cody, Yang, Dong
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4980633/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27511746
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep31282
_version_ 1782447489555628032
author Xu, Mengsi
Li, Zhiai
Diao, Liuting
Zhang, Lijie
Yuan, Jiajin
Ding, Cody
Yang, Dong
author_facet Xu, Mengsi
Li, Zhiai
Diao, Liuting
Zhang, Lijie
Yuan, Jiajin
Ding, Cody
Yang, Dong
author_sort Xu, Mengsi
collection PubMed
description Many studies have investigated how exclusion affects cognitive control and have reported inconsistent results. However, these studies usually treated cognitive control as a unitary concept, whereas it actually involved two main sub-processes: conflict detection and response implementation. Furthermore, existing studies have focused primarily on exclusion’s effects on conscious cognitive control, while recent studies have shown the existence of unconscious cognitive control. Therefore, the present study investigated whether and how exclusion affects the sub-processes underlying conscious and unconscious cognitive control differently. The Cyberball game was used to manipulate social exclusion and participants subsequently performed a masked Go/No-Go task during which event-related potentials were measured. For conscious cognitive control, excluded participants showed a larger N2 but smaller P3 effects than included participants, suggesting that excluded people invest more attention in conscious conflict detection, but less in conscious inhibition of impulsive responses. However, for unconscious cognitive control, excluded participants showed a smaller N2 but larger P3 effects than included participants, suggesting that excluded people invest less attention in unconscious conflict detection, but more in unconscious inhibition of impulsive responses. Together, these results suggest that exclusion causes people to rebalance attention allocation priorities for cognitive control according to a more flexible and adaptive strategy.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4980633
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Nature Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49806332016-08-19 Social exclusion modulates priorities of attention allocation in cognitive control Xu, Mengsi Li, Zhiai Diao, Liuting Zhang, Lijie Yuan, Jiajin Ding, Cody Yang, Dong Sci Rep Article Many studies have investigated how exclusion affects cognitive control and have reported inconsistent results. However, these studies usually treated cognitive control as a unitary concept, whereas it actually involved two main sub-processes: conflict detection and response implementation. Furthermore, existing studies have focused primarily on exclusion’s effects on conscious cognitive control, while recent studies have shown the existence of unconscious cognitive control. Therefore, the present study investigated whether and how exclusion affects the sub-processes underlying conscious and unconscious cognitive control differently. The Cyberball game was used to manipulate social exclusion and participants subsequently performed a masked Go/No-Go task during which event-related potentials were measured. For conscious cognitive control, excluded participants showed a larger N2 but smaller P3 effects than included participants, suggesting that excluded people invest more attention in conscious conflict detection, but less in conscious inhibition of impulsive responses. However, for unconscious cognitive control, excluded participants showed a smaller N2 but larger P3 effects than included participants, suggesting that excluded people invest less attention in unconscious conflict detection, but more in unconscious inhibition of impulsive responses. Together, these results suggest that exclusion causes people to rebalance attention allocation priorities for cognitive control according to a more flexible and adaptive strategy. Nature Publishing Group 2016-08-11 /pmc/articles/PMC4980633/ /pubmed/27511746 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep31282 Text en Copyright © 2016, The Author(s) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in the credit line; if the material is not included under the Creative Commons license, users will need to obtain permission from the license holder to reproduce the material. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
spellingShingle Article
Xu, Mengsi
Li, Zhiai
Diao, Liuting
Zhang, Lijie
Yuan, Jiajin
Ding, Cody
Yang, Dong
Social exclusion modulates priorities of attention allocation in cognitive control
title Social exclusion modulates priorities of attention allocation in cognitive control
title_full Social exclusion modulates priorities of attention allocation in cognitive control
title_fullStr Social exclusion modulates priorities of attention allocation in cognitive control
title_full_unstemmed Social exclusion modulates priorities of attention allocation in cognitive control
title_short Social exclusion modulates priorities of attention allocation in cognitive control
title_sort social exclusion modulates priorities of attention allocation in cognitive control
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4980633/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27511746
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep31282
work_keys_str_mv AT xumengsi socialexclusionmodulatesprioritiesofattentionallocationincognitivecontrol
AT lizhiai socialexclusionmodulatesprioritiesofattentionallocationincognitivecontrol
AT diaoliuting socialexclusionmodulatesprioritiesofattentionallocationincognitivecontrol
AT zhanglijie socialexclusionmodulatesprioritiesofattentionallocationincognitivecontrol
AT yuanjiajin socialexclusionmodulatesprioritiesofattentionallocationincognitivecontrol
AT dingcody socialexclusionmodulatesprioritiesofattentionallocationincognitivecontrol
AT yangdong socialexclusionmodulatesprioritiesofattentionallocationincognitivecontrol