Sex differences in event-related potentials and attentional biases to emotional facial stimuli.

Daniela M Pfabigan,Uta Sailer,Elisabeth Lamplmayr-Kragl,Nina M Pintzinger,Ulrich S Tran

doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01477

Daniela M Pfabigan, Uta Sailer + Show 3 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01477

Copy DOI

Abstract

Attentional processes play an important role in the processing of emotional information. Previous research reported attentional biases during stimulus processing in anxiety and depression. However, sex differences in the processing of emotional stimuli and higher prevalence rates of anxiety disorders among women, compared to men, suggest that attentional biases may also differ between the two sexes. The present study used a modified version of the dot probe task with happy, angry, and neutral facial stimuli to investigate the time course of attentional biases in healthy volunteers. Moreover, associations of attentional biases with alexithymia were examined on the behavioral and physiological level. Event-related potentials were measured while 21 participants (11 women) performed the task, utilizing also for the first time a difference wave approach in the analysis to highlight emotion-specific aspects. Women showed overall enhanced probe P1 amplitudes compared to men, in particular after rewarding facial stimuli. Using the difference wave approach, probe P1 amplitudes appeared specifically enhanced with regard to congruently presented happy facial stimuli among women, compared to men. Both methods yielded enhanced probe P1 amplitudes after presentation of the emotional stimulus in the left compared to the right visual hemifield. Probe P1 amplitudes correlated negatively with self-reported alexithymia, most of these correlations were only observable in women. Our results suggest that women orient their attention to a greater extent to facial stimuli than men and corroborate that alexithymia is a correlate of reduced emotional reactivity on a neuronal level. We recommend using a difference wave approach when addressing attentional processes of orientation and disengagement also in future studies.

Highlights

Attentional processes play an important role in the processing of emotional information and with regard to the development and maintenance of symptoms of anxiety and depression: anxious and depressive subjects allocate more attention to threatening stimuli and less attention to pleasant stimuli and cues of reward (e.g., Bar-Haim et al, 2007; Frewen et al, 2008; Staugaard, 2010; Yiend, 2010)
In order to elucidate and to expand on previous inconsistent findings, the present study focused on the examination of sex differences in probe P1 amplitudes, utilizing the dot probe paradigm with emotional facial stimuli
We found that probe P1 amplitudes were overall enhanced among women, compared to men, in particular after rewarding facial stimuli

Summary

Introduction

Attentional processes play an important role in the processing of emotional information and with regard to the development and maintenance of symptoms of anxiety and depression: anxious and depressive subjects allocate more attention to threatening stimuli and less attention to pleasant stimuli and cues of reward (e.g., Bar-Haim et al, 2007; Frewen et al, 2008; Staugaard, 2010; Yiend, 2010). Women are known to have higher prevalence rates of anxiety disorders than men (e.g., Kessler et al, 2005) and it is an established finding that there are sex differences in the processing of emotional stimuli (Cahill, 2006). Killgore and Yurgelun-Todd (2001) observed enhanced activation in the right amygdala when presenting happy faces only in their male participants. The presentation of fearful faces evoked enhanced left amygdala activation in both sexes. Enhanced bilateral amygdala activation was positively related to better fear recognition only in their male participants. The amygdala is considered to be actively involved in driving emotional enhancement, i.e., exerting modulatory influence on visual processing of emotional stimuli (Vuilleumier et al, 2004)

Methods

Results

Conclusion