健康与遗传心理学研究室知识库

疼痛对个体的生存具有重要意义，是机体处于危险的原型预警信号，表示机体己经或即将发生组织损伤。疼痛的预警意义使其会自动捕获注意，干扰当前认知活动。大量研究显示，个体对疼痛具有注意偏向，疼痛相关信息能够改变注意资源的空间分配，使其他信息分配到较少的注意资源。但是，当前关于疼痛和注意研究主要集中在注意的空间维度，缺乏时间维度的系统探讨:首先，疼痛刺激对注意的捕获是否会导致后续的认知活动受损(我们称之为疼痛的“后续干扰效应”)，目前缺少系统的实证研究;其次，疼痛的“后续干扰效应”的时间动态、影响因素、神经机制尚缺乏系统性的研究。在己有研究基础上，本论文提出，由于疼痛刺激会捕获过多注意资源，导致分配到后续认知活动的资源减少，进而导致疼痛刺激后一定时间内进行的认知活动表现受损，其受损的程度受到刺激属性和认知活动的特性影响。

为了探究上述问题，本文设计四个研究。研究一是综述性元分析，首先确定疼痛对注意不同成分的即时干扰效应。将己有的探究疼痛对注意影响的实验研究结果提取，进行元分析，得到较为可靠的结论。元分析发现，疼痛刺激对指向注意和持续注意有干扰效应，对执行注意没有影响。确定了疼痛对注意不同成分即时干扰效应的选择性。研究二创新性地设置疼痛刺激与注意任务之间的时间间隔 (ISI)，观察不同组别被试在不同ISI条件下的注意表现，分别探究热痛对注意不同成分(实验一，指向注意;实验二，执行注意)的“后续干扰效应”。采用3(被试组别:疼痛组，非痛组，控制组)X 4 ( ISI: 0 ms, 250 ms, 750 ms, 1500 ms的混合设计，发现热痛对指向注意的后续干扰持续至少1500 ms，对执行注意没有影响。实验三、四采用电刺激重复实验一、二，以探究疼痛刺激类型对“后续干扰”的影响，结果发现，电刺激对指向注意的后续干扰持续约1250 ms，对执行注意没有影响。研究二证明疼痛刺激存在“后续干扰效应”，具体持续时间受后续任务类型及疼痛类型影响。研究三采用疼痛相关信息探究“后续干扰效应”是否受到与疼痛相关/无关调节。实验五、六分别采用词汇判断和结构判断任务，采用3(被试组别:疼痛组，非痛组，控制组)X3(词汇类型:疼痛词，消极词，积极词)X 3 CISI: 0 ms, 250 ms, 1250 ms)的混合设计，探究疼痛对后续的疼痛相关信息加工的影响，结果发现，后续任务是否与疼痛相关并不影响其“后续效应”。研究四采用脑电技术探究疼痛影响注意时间维度分配的神经机制，采用单因素三水平的被试间实验设计，发现疼痛呈现后的50-125 ms对注意资源的分配有显著影响，这与疼痛刺激诱发的脑电成分的感知觉成分的时间窗一致。这一结果表明，疼痛的感知觉维度的凸显性改变了注意资源的时间维度上的分配。

总之，本论文从行为学和脑电方面验证了疼痛刺激的“后续干扰效应”及其时间动态、影响因素及神经机制。这些研究为我们对疼痛与注意的相互关系提供动态研究的新视角。

Pain is of great significance to the survival of an individual. It is a prototype early warning signal that the body is in danger, which indicates that the bo街has suffered or is about to suffer damage. Pain automatically captures attention because of the warning signal, which interrupts the current cognitive performance. Many studies have shown that the capture of pain to attention led to the attentional bias to pain, and pain-related information changed the spatial allocation of attention resources so that the performances after pain were allocated to fewer attention resources. However, the current researches on pain and attention are mainly focused on the spatial dimension of attention, lacking the systematic research of time dimension: first, there was no systematic empirical research about whether the capture of attention by pain stimulation will lead to the impairment of subsequent cognitive activities (i.e., the "subsequent interruptive effect" of pain); second, the temporal dynamics, influence factors and neural mechanism of the "subsequent interruptive effect" were lack of systematic researches. Based on previous studies, this paper proposes that pain stimulation capture too much attention resources and reduce the resources allocated to subsequent cognitive activities, which leads to cognitive activity performance impairment within a certain period time after pain stimulation, and the degree of impairment is affected by the characteristics of pain stimulation and cognitive activities.

In order to explore the above issues, we designed four studies. The first study was a meta-analysis, which determined the immediate interference effect of pain on different components of attention. The existing experimentally-induced pain on attention was extracted for meta-analysis, and a more reliable conclusion was obtained. Meta-analysis showed that pain had an interference effect on orienting attention and sustained attention, but did not affect executive attention. This result confirmed the immediate interference effect of pain on attention. In Study 2, we explored the attention performance of three groups under different ISI (the interval of the offset of pain stimulation and the presentation of attention task) conditions and explored the "subsequent interruptive effect" of pain on different components of attention (Experiment 1，orienting attention; Experiment 2, executive attention). Mixed design of 3 (Group: pain, non-pain, control) X 4 (ISI: 0 ms, 250 ms, 750 ms, 1500 ms) was used. It was found that the subsequent interference of thermal pain on orienting attention lasted at least 1500 ms and had no effect on executive attention. In Experiment 3 and Experiment 4, we repeated Experiment 1 and Experiment 2 with electrical stimulation to explore the effect of pain stimulation type on "subsequent interrupt". The results showed that the subsequent interrupt of electrical stimulation on orienting attention lasted 1250 ms, but had no effect on executive attention. This study shows that there is a "subsequent interruptive effect" of pain stimulation, and the duration is affected by the type of subsequent cognitive tasks and pain types. In Study 3, pain-related information was used to explore whether the "subsequent interruptive effect" was affected by the relation to pain. In Experiments 5 and 6, we performed a lexical decision task and structure decision task respectively. The mixed design of 3 (Group: pain, non-pain, control) X 4 (Categories of words: pain words, negative words, positive words) X3 (ISI: 0 ms, 250 ms, 1250 ms) was used to explore the effect of pain on the subsequent pain-related information processing. The results showed that whether the subsequent task is related to pain does not affect the "subsequent interrupt effect" of pain. In study 4, we used EEG technology to explore the neural mechanism of pain affecting the temporal distribution of attention resources. Using a single factor and three levels of experimental design, we found that the presentation of pain resulted in a significant decrease of attentional resources at 50-125 ms, which was consistent with the time window of the sensory components of EEG induced by pain stimulation. The results show that the salience of the perceptual dimension of pain changes the allocation of attention resources in the time dimension. In a word, this paper explores the "subsequent interruptive effect" of pain stimulation from behavioral and EEG aspects and studies its influencing factors and neural mechanism. These studies provide us with a new perspective on the relationship between pain and attention.