No Evidence for Threat-Induced Spatial Prioritization of Somatosensory Stimulation during Pain Control Using a Synchrony Judgment Paradigm.

Topical research efforts on attention to pain often take a critical look at the modulatory role of top-down factors. For instance, it has been shown that the fearful expectation of pain at a location of the body directs attention towards that body part. In addition, motivated attempts to control thi...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Wouter Durnez, Stefaan Van Damme
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2016-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4896434?pdf=render
id doaj-850066574d024df086d1f60ec5429a22
record_format Article
spelling doaj-850066574d024df086d1f60ec5429a222020-11-25T01:24:49ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032016-01-01116e015664810.1371/journal.pone.0156648No Evidence for Threat-Induced Spatial Prioritization of Somatosensory Stimulation during Pain Control Using a Synchrony Judgment Paradigm.Wouter DurnezStefaan Van DammeTopical research efforts on attention to pain often take a critical look at the modulatory role of top-down factors. For instance, it has been shown that the fearful expectation of pain at a location of the body directs attention towards that body part. In addition, motivated attempts to control this pain were found to modulate this prioritization effect. Such studies have often used a temporal order judgment task, requiring participants to judge the order in which two stimuli are presented by indicating which one they perceived first. As this constitutes a forced-choice response format, such studies may be subject to response bias. The aim of the current study was to address this concern. We used a ternary synchrony judgment paradigm, in which participants judged the order in which two somatosensory stimuli occurred. Critically, participants now also had the option to give a 'simultaneous' response when they did not perceive a difference. This way we eliminated the need for guessing, and thus reduced the risk of response bias. One location was threatened with the possibility of pain in half of the trials, as predicted by an auditory cue. Additionally, half of the participants (pain control group) were encouraged to avoid pain stimuli by executing a quick button press. The other half (comparison group) performed a similar action, albeit unrelated to the occurrence of pain. Our data did not support threat-induced spatial prioritization, nor did we find evidence that pain control attempts influenced attention in any way.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4896434?pdf=render
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Wouter Durnez
Stefaan Van Damme
spellingShingle Wouter Durnez
Stefaan Van Damme
No Evidence for Threat-Induced Spatial Prioritization of Somatosensory Stimulation during Pain Control Using a Synchrony Judgment Paradigm.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Wouter Durnez
Stefaan Van Damme
author_sort Wouter Durnez
title No Evidence for Threat-Induced Spatial Prioritization of Somatosensory Stimulation during Pain Control Using a Synchrony Judgment Paradigm.
title_short No Evidence for Threat-Induced Spatial Prioritization of Somatosensory Stimulation during Pain Control Using a Synchrony Judgment Paradigm.
title_full No Evidence for Threat-Induced Spatial Prioritization of Somatosensory Stimulation during Pain Control Using a Synchrony Judgment Paradigm.
title_fullStr No Evidence for Threat-Induced Spatial Prioritization of Somatosensory Stimulation during Pain Control Using a Synchrony Judgment Paradigm.
title_full_unstemmed No Evidence for Threat-Induced Spatial Prioritization of Somatosensory Stimulation during Pain Control Using a Synchrony Judgment Paradigm.
title_sort no evidence for threat-induced spatial prioritization of somatosensory stimulation during pain control using a synchrony judgment paradigm.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2016-01-01
description Topical research efforts on attention to pain often take a critical look at the modulatory role of top-down factors. For instance, it has been shown that the fearful expectation of pain at a location of the body directs attention towards that body part. In addition, motivated attempts to control this pain were found to modulate this prioritization effect. Such studies have often used a temporal order judgment task, requiring participants to judge the order in which two stimuli are presented by indicating which one they perceived first. As this constitutes a forced-choice response format, such studies may be subject to response bias. The aim of the current study was to address this concern. We used a ternary synchrony judgment paradigm, in which participants judged the order in which two somatosensory stimuli occurred. Critically, participants now also had the option to give a 'simultaneous' response when they did not perceive a difference. This way we eliminated the need for guessing, and thus reduced the risk of response bias. One location was threatened with the possibility of pain in half of the trials, as predicted by an auditory cue. Additionally, half of the participants (pain control group) were encouraged to avoid pain stimuli by executing a quick button press. The other half (comparison group) performed a similar action, albeit unrelated to the occurrence of pain. Our data did not support threat-induced spatial prioritization, nor did we find evidence that pain control attempts influenced attention in any way.
url http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4896434?pdf=render
work_keys_str_mv AT wouterdurnez noevidenceforthreatinducedspatialprioritizationofsomatosensorystimulationduringpaincontrolusingasynchronyjudgmentparadigm
AT stefaanvandamme noevidenceforthreatinducedspatialprioritizationofsomatosensorystimulationduringpaincontrolusingasynchronyjudgmentparadigm
_version_ 1725116920959598592