Search

Dissertação de Mestrado em Marketing apresentada na Escola Superior de Ciências Empresariais do Instituto Politécnico de Viana do Castelo Nos últimos anos, o rápido e explosivo desenvolvimento das redes sociais alterou a forma como as pessoas comunicam entre si. As chamadas redes sociais ou social media, tornaram-se, não só, facilitadoras da distribuição de informação, em tempo real entre os utilizadores espalhados pelo Mundo, como também, originaram um crescimento exponencial das chamadas Fake News, precursoras de graves surtos de desinformação online. O combate a essa desinformação apenas será possível se compreendermos como as Fake News são detetadas/tratadas e o seu peso no comportamento dos utilizadores portugueses, temáticas estas retratadas no âmbito da investigação a que nos propomos. As Fake News, a sua propagação nas redes sociais com especial enfoque na rede social Facebook, como são detetadas/tratadas e o peso no comportamento dos utilizadores portugueses são pontos fulcrais para todo o desenrolar desta investigação. Com esse intuito, procedemos ao estudo da forma como os utilizadores portugueses interagem com as notícias falsas e que métodos seguem para contrariar a sua difusão através do uso da metodologia Questionário Online. Segundo os resultados obtidos no inquérito, os visados consideram que as Fake News têm influência no grau de credibilidade que estes têm da comunicação das marcas, uma vez que, na maior parte dos casos, estes confirmam sempre ou quase sempre a veracidade dos conteúdos partilhados pelas marcas na rede social Facebook usando os sítios oficiais (website, loja) das mesmas, demonstrando dúvidas quando a fonte não é fidedigna. No entanto, as suas respostas não traduzam, totalmente, essa assertividade. In recent years, the rapid and explosive development of social networks has changed the way people communicate with each other. The so-called social networks or social media have become, not only facilitators of the distribution of information in real time between users spread around the world, but have also caused an exponential growth of the so-called Fake News, precursors of serious outbreaks of disinformation online. Combating this disinformation will only be possible if we understand how Fake News are detected/treated and their weight in the behaviour of Portuguese users, themes that are portrayed in the scope of the research we propose. The Fake News, its propagation in the social networks with special focus on the social network Facebook, how it is detected/treated and its weight in the behaviour of Portuguese users are key points for the entire development of this research. With that purpose, we proceeded to the study of how Portuguese users interact with fake news and which methods they follow to counteract its diffusion through the use of the Online Questionnaire methodology. According to the results obtained in the survey, the targets consider that Fake News have influence in the degree of credibility they have about the brands' communication in most of the cases, mosto f the time they confirm the veracity of the contents shared by the brands on the social network Facebook using their official sites (website, shop), showing doubts when the source is not reliable. However, their answers do not fully translate that assertiveness.

Este manual de apoio à aprendizagem foi elaborado com o objetivo de dar suporte às unidades curriculares relacionadas com temas avançados de reabilitação dos ciclos de estudos de Licenciatura e Mestrado em Terapia Ocupacional da Escola Superior de Saúde do Instituto Politécnico do Porto, podendo ser igualmente utilizado noutros ciclos de estudos nas áreas de Terapia e Reabilitação e de Fisiologia Clínica. Consiste num guia compreensivo sobre a utilização da estimulação transcraniana por corrente contínua como ferramenta de intervenção para a prestação de cuidados de saúde e reabilitação na doença mental e neurológica, abrangendo os seus fundamentos básicos, procedimentos de aplicação prática e segurança, parametrização de protocolos (incluindo a utilização de modelos computacionais) e evidência atualizada sobre a sua eficácia.

The current study aims to examine the association between beliefs in COVID-19 conspiracy theories and psychotic-like experiences within the community, while also addressing the role of other contributing variables such as sociodemographic information (sex, age, education), psychological outcomes (e.g., stress, affective states) as well as other pandemic-related factors (e.g., isolation conditions, health concerns, etc).

The project described here encompasses two major studies. The goals, hypothesis, and analysis plan for each study will be separately described, although data collection procedures were shared by both studies. More information about this project can be found at https://osf.io/hmtz9/. Study 1. Untangling Self-Reported Interoceptive Accuracy and Attention: Evidence from the European Portuguese Validation of the Interoceptive Accuracy Scale and the Body Perception Questionnaire Interoception, broadly defined as the perception of the body’s internal states (Craig, 2002) has been widely associated with several domains of cognitive and emotional processing (e.g., Barrett, 2017; Critchley & Harrison, 2013; Damasio, 1994; Marshall et al., 2018; Pereira et al., 2019; Seth & Friston, 2016) and implicated in a wide range of psychiatric disorders (e.g., Khalsa et al., 2017; Murphy et al., 2017). These findings have led researchers in the field to propose different frameworks to address the challenges of measuring individual differences in interoception (e.g., Ceunen et al., 2013, Garfinkel et al., 2015, Khalsa et al., 2017), although proposed taxonomies only focused on the different measurement methods (i.e., questionnaires vs. experimental tasks). More recently, Murphy et al. (2019) proposed a 2 x 2 factorial framework to categorize individual differences in interoception: Factor 1, differentiates what is measured (interoceptive accuracy, the ability to accurately perceive interoceptive signals vs. interoceptive attention, the degree to which interoceptive signals are the object of attention); Factor 2, distinguishes how interoception is measured (via self-report measures assessing an individual’s beliefs regarding their interoceptive ability vs. objective measures, that assess performance on objective tests of interoception). Subsequently, Murphy et al. (2020) provided further evidence for this framework, finding that self-report measures of interoceptive accuracy such as the Interoceptive Confusion Questionnaire (Brewer et al., 2016) and the newly developed Interoceptive Accuracy Scale (IAS) were uncorrelated with the Body Awareness subscale of the Body Perception Questionnaire (BPQ; Porges, 1993), a widely used self-report measure of interoceptive attention. These results support a distinction between self-report interoceptive accuracy and attention, although this should be ideally replicated in other samples to further strengthen the validity of the 2 x 2 factorial model of interoception. Finally, it is also important to highlight that studies exploring the psychometric proprieties of self-report questionnaires of interoception are still scare. For instance, although the BPQ was developed over 25 years ago and has been widely used since then, there is only one recently published study exploring its psychometric properties (Cabrera et al., 2018). Moreover, the IAS was validated quite recently and also requires further psychometric testing (Murphy et al., 2020). Thus, Study 1 has the following main goals: 1. Translate, validate, and assess the psychometric properties of the European Portuguese versions of the IAS and the BPQ. 2. Investigate the association between self-reported interoceptive accuracy and attention (measured by the IAS and the BPQ Body Awareness subscale, respectively). Study 2. Dissociating Cognitive and Affective Empathy in Psychopathic Phenotypes: The Role of Interoceptive Attention and Accuracy According to the Triarchic Model (Patrick et al., 2009), psychopathy reflects the convergence of three etiological phenotypes: boldness, characterized by fearlessness, invulnerability to stress, social influence, and dominance; meanness, defined by callous self-interested pursuit of resources, reduced empathy, and social closeness; disinhibition, characterized by lack of behavioral restraint, poor planning, and impaired emotional regulation. Boldness and meanness share low fear as their etiological pathway, while both meanness and disinhibition are associated with externalizing vulnerability. As this model is fairly recent and widely debated, further insights about the mechanisms underlying each phenotype are needed. Empathy can be a key construct to disentangle these phenotypes. Recent frameworks suggest that empathy encompasses two main domains (Stietz et al., 2019): cognitive empathy, defined as the ability to make inferences about or represent the mental states of others, and affective empathy, defined as the isomorphic sharing of the affective state of another person. There is evidence suggesting that these empathy domains are differentially associated with psychopathic phenotypes (e.g. Almeida et al., 2015; Stanley et al., 2013; Sellbom & Phillips, 2013; Paiva et al., 2020). Meanness has been associated with empathy deficits including both affective and cognitive domains. Boldness has been positively associated with cognitive empathy, while results regarding affective empathy are inconsistent. Although disinhibition seems positively associated with affective empathy, it is not clear whether cognitive empathy is negatively associated or unrelated to this phenotype. Despite these findings, little is known about the underlying mechanisms that drive the dissociation of empathy domains across psychopathic phenotypes. Interoception (perception of the body’s internal states) may be a putative candidate to explain this complex interaction. It has been suggested that atypical affective experience plays a critical role in empathy deficits in psychopathy (Blair et al., 2005; Brook et al., 2013). Interoception has been widely linked to affective experience, contributing not only to the processing of our own emotional information but also to our ability to perceive and share the emotional states of others (e.g., Barrett, 2017; Seth & Friston, 2016; Fotopoulous & Tsakiris, 2017; Ondobaka et al., 2017). This suggests that empathy deficits in psychopathy could be explained by impaired interoceptive processing, as low interoceptive sensitivity may preclude subjects with high psychopathic traits from perceiving somatic sensations that signal the emotional valence of situations (Gao et al., 2012; Hoppenbrouwers et al., 2016). Until now there are only a handful of studies exploring the link between psychopathy and interoception (Lamoureux, 2019; Lyons & Hughes, 2015; Nentjes et al., 2013; Zwets et al., 2014) and most of them were conducted in criminal samples. Also, there are not any studies exploring the association of interoception with the triarchic psychopathic phenotypes. Finally, neither of the previous studies applied a formal theoretical framework to measure individual differences in interoception. There is recent evidence supporting a bifactorial model to evaluate interoception (Murphy et al., 2019; Murphy et al., 2020). This model distinguishes what is being measured (interoceptive accuracy, defined as the ability to accurately perceive interoceptive signals vs. interoceptive attention, the degree to which interoceptive signals are the object of attention) and how is it being measured (self-report vs. objective measures). Thus, Study 2 has the following main goals: 1. Investigate the association of psychopathic traits with empathy domains (cognitive and affective) and interoception (self-reported interoceptive attention and accuracy). 2. Examine the association of psychopathy with empathy and interoception using the psychopathic phenotypes suggested by the triarchic model (boldness, meanness, and disinhibition) as well as the classical factor structure of psychopathy (primary vs. secondary). 3. Investigate the association between empathy domains (cognitive and affective) and interoception (self-reported interoceptive attention and accuracy). 4. Test whether the associations between psychopathic traits, empathy and interoception are retained after controlling for alexithymia. 5. Explore whether interoceptive attention and/or accuracy mediate the association between psychopathic traits and cognitive/affective empathy.

Murphy et al. (2019) proposed a 2 x 2 factorial framework to categorize individual differences in interoception: Factor 1, differentiates what is measured (interoceptive accuracy, the ability to accurately perceive interoceptive signals vs. interoceptive attention, the degree to which interoceptive signals are the object of attention); Factor 2, distinguishes how interoception is measured (via self-report measures assessing an individual’s beliefs regarding their interoceptive ability vs. objective measures, that assess performance on objective tests of interoception). Subsequently, Murphy et al. (2020) provided further evidence for this framework, finding that self-report measures of interoceptive accuracy such as the Interoceptive Confusion Questionnaire (ICQ; Brewer, Cook, & Bird, 2016) and the Interoceptive Accuracy Scale (IAS) were uncorrelated with the Body Awareness subscale of the Body Perception Questionnaire (BPQ; Porges, 1993), a widely used self-report measure of interoceptive attention. A recent exploratory analysis using the dataset from Murphy et al. (2020) suggested a putative quadratic association between self-reported interoceptive accuracy and attention, whereby both high and low levels of self-reported interoceptive attention (as quantified by the BPQ Body Awareness subscale) are associated with higher self-reported interoceptive accuracy (measured by the IAS and the ICQ). This quadratic association was significant whether the long or short version score of the BPQ Body Awareness was used in the model. Whilst this quadratic association supports the assertion that these measures may assess different constructs (accuracy and attention), it suggests that they appear to be differentially associated at different degrees of attention. The question remains, however, as to what is driving this association; this quadratic association between self-reported interoceptive accuracy and attention may represent a true nonlinear relationship between both constructs or could also be explained due to differences across the questionnaires (e.g. the different internal signals assessed varies across measures). Thus, the present studies have two major goals: 1. Describe the findings from the exploratory analysis examining the quadratic association between self-reported accuracy and attention, using pooled data from several studies reported in Murphy et al. (2020). 2. Confirmatory testing of the quadratic association between self-reported interoceptive accuracy (measured by the IAS and ICQ) and attention (measured by the BPQ Body Awareness), using two new samples that are currently being collected in different countries (Portugal and United Kingdom).

This project uses bihemispheric tDCS over the primary motor cortex to improve dual-task motor performance in a sample of subjects with chronic stroke.

The project described here encompasses two major studies assessing the association between individual differences using self-report questionnaires and self-other distinction indexed by the Imitation-Inhibition Task. The goals, hypothesis, and analysis plan for each study will be separately described, although data collection procedures were shared by both studies. More information about this project can be found at https://osf.io/mu8vr/. Study 1. The role of interoception in self-other distinction: What can it teach us about empathy and alexithymia? Palmer & Tsakiris (2018) proposed an explanatory model addressing the complex interaction between interoceptive accuracy, self-other distinction, and social cognitive performance. These authors argued that in social tasks requiring high levels of self-other distinction, subjects with high levels of interoceptive accuracy should display better performance as they are able to keep a more stable representation of their own bodily self. Conversely, in tasks where less self-other distinction is required (e.g., emotional contagion), subjects with low interoceptive accuracy may display enhanced performance. This model provides a valuable framework to test the associations between self-other distinction and individual differences in interoception, empathy, and alexithymia, constructs that have been widely associated with each other within the field. First, within this model, it would be expected that self-other distinction would be enhanced in subjects with high interoceptive accuracy. Secondly, we argue that the cognitive empathy domain requires higher self-other distinction, as this empathy domain often requires that people effectively represent mental states of others that are incongruent with their own mental states. Consequently, cognitive empathy would be positively associated with interoceptive accuracy, as observed in a previous sample collected by our research group (Campos, Barbosa, et al., 2020). Conversely, affective empathy may imply lower levels of self-other distinction, as we are required to effectively share an isomorphic affective state which is being experienced by others. Thus, it will be expected that affective empathy is negatively associated with interoceptive accuracy or unrelated to it, as observed in our previous work (Campos, Barbosa, et al., 2020). Finally, this model could also provide a valuable framework to examine the association between self-other distinction and alexithymia. Alexithymia has been consistently negatively associated with interoceptive (Trevisan et al., 2019). Hence, it would be expected a similar negative association between self-other distinction and alexithymia. Regardless of these hypotheses, several other questions and inconsistencies in the field also remain to be answered. For instance, Palmer & Tsakiris (2018) described the association between interoceptive accuracy and self-other distinction, but the recent 2 x 2 factorial framework to categorize individual differences in interoception argues that this construct can be clearly divided into two unrelated domains: interoceptive attention, the degree to which interoceptive signals are the object of attention; and interoceptive accuracy, the ability to accurately perceive interoceptive signals (Campos, Barbosa, et al., 2020; Campos, Murphy, et al., 2020; Gabriele et al., 2020; J. Murphy et al., 2019, 2020). Thus, it would be valuable to examine whether interoceptive attention and accuracy are differentially associated with self-other distinction. Another important issue is that we will be operationalizing self-other distinction using the Inhibitory-Imitation Task (Hogeveen et al., 2015). In this task, subjects are required to inhibit the motor representation of the other person’s movements and to enhance their self-generated motor representation to perform the task successfully. Previous data examining the association of imitation-inhibition (indexing self-other distinction) with empathy, interoception, and alexithymia does not seem to adequately fit the model proposed by Palmer & Tsakiris (2018), although there are some limitations to existing evidence. For instance, there is meta-analytical evidence suggesting that self-other distinction (index by imitation-inhibition) is not associated with either cognitive or affective empathy (Cracco et al., 2018). However, almost all studies included in this review used the Interpersonal Reactivity Index to measure empathy, a measure that has faced some criticism due to its poor psychometric proprieties (Chrysikou & Thompson, 2016; B. A. Murphy et al., 2020; B. A. Murphy & Lilienfeld, 2019; Wang et al., 2020). Thus, there is a need to further test the association of the Inhibitory-Imitation Task with cognitive and affective empathy, using a questionnaire that more adequately operationalizes these empathy domains. There is also evidence suggesting that self-other distinction (indexed by imitation-inhibition) is negatively associated with interoceptive accuracy (Ainley et al., 2014) and positively associated with alexithymia (Sowden et al., 2016), which would not be consistent with the premises proposed by Palmer & Tsakiris (2018). However, both these studies operationalized interoceptive accuracy using performance-based cardiac tasks which only provide information about one interoceptive modality. Thus, using a self-report interoceptive accuracy scale that assesses several interoceptive signals may provide valuable insights into the association between self-other distinction and interoception. In sum, Study 1 has the following main goals: - Examine the associations between self-other distinction (indexed by imitation-inhibition) and individual differences in interoceptive attention and accuracy, cognitive and affective empathy, and alexithymia. - Investigate whether the associations between self-other distinction and individual differences in interoception, empathy, and alexithymia are independent of broader inhibitory control abilities (indexed by non-imitative inhibitory control. - Explore the complex interplay between interoception, empathy, and alexithymia. Study 2. Self-other distinction across psychopathy dimensions: evidence from the Imitation-Inhibition Task Psychopathy is a multidimensional personality construct encompassing affective (e.g., callousness, lack of empathy) and interpersonal traits (e.g., deceitfulness, social dominance), as well as maladaptive manifestations closely related to antisocial behavior (e.g., disinhibition, impulsivity; (Hare & Neumann, 2008; Patrick et al., 2009). Currently, there are two major frameworks to measure psychopathy traits: (1) the classical 2-factors model, encompassing interpersonal-affective (Factor 1) and impulsive-antisocial features (Factor 2; Hare et al., 1990; Hare & Neumann, 2008). These broader factors can be further decomposed into four more specific facets (facet 1: interpersonal traits, facet 2: affective traits, facet 3: impulsive lifestyle, facet 4: antisocial behavior) without losing model fit (Hare & Neumann, 2008); (2) the more contemporary 3-dimensional models that cover both adaptive and maladaptive expressions of psychopath (Patrick et al., 2009). This model includes boldness-fearlessness traits, a dimension which maps positive adjustment indicators (e.g., low reactivity to stress, resilience, persuasion), meanness/cold-heartedness traits, encompassing attributes related to cruelty, insensitivity, deficient empathy, and contempt for close attachments with others, and disinhibition, referring to behavioral deficits in impulse control. Empathy is a fundamental process underpinning human interactions and is widely regarded as a hallmark of psychopathy. A recent meta-analysis by our research team found differential associations between empathy domains (cognitive and affective empathy) and the psychopathy dimensions preconized by the main theoretical models of psychopathy (Campos et al., 2021). However, there is still a need to understand which mechanisms may underlie the different empathic profiles observed across psychopathy dimensions. Recent social cognition models have highlighted the important role of self-other distinction in social behavior (Bird & Viding, 2014; Happé et al., 2017; Lamm et al., 2016; Palmer & Tsakiris, 2018), which can be an interesting candidate to explain the complex interaction between empathy and psychopathy dimensions. Individuals with high psychopathy traits display abnormal brain activation when instructed to take the “other perspective” on empathy for pain tasks (Decety et al., 2013). Conversely, these individuals display typical empathy-related brain activations when they are explicitly asked to empathize with others (Meffert et al., 2013), suggesting that psychopathy may be associated with a top-down self-other distinction mechanism that compensates for the absence of automatic emotional responses (Lamm et al., 2016) . However, there is still a need to refine the association between self-other distinction and psychopathy by contemplating the multidimensional nature of this personality construct. We argue that using the self-other distinction framework proposed by Palmer & Tsakiris (2018) it is feasible to hypothesize and test how psychopathy dimensions are related to self-other distinction, especially when considering their previously observed empathic profiles (Campos, Barbosa, et al., 2020; Campos et al., 2021). To accomplish this, we will operationalize self-other distinction using the Imitation-Inhibition task (Hogeveen et al., 2015). To our knowledge, there is only one study assessing the association between psychopathy traits and self-other distinction assessed by the Imitation-Inhibition task, that only presented results regarding the classical 2-factor structure (Genschow, Bardi, et al., 2019). Also, the Imitation-Inhibition task version that we will be using includes a non-imitative inhibitory control manipulation. There have been several studies assessing the association between inhibitory control and psychopathy traits, although findings are somewhat inconsistent for some psychopathy dimensions (Derefinko, 2015; Feilhauer et al., 2012; Pasion et al., 2018; Weidacker et al., 2017; Williams, 2020). However, examining the association of psychopathy with both imitation-inhibition (indexing self-other distinction) and non-imitative inhibitory control conditions will allow us to understand whether each psychopathy dimension is specifically associated with impaired or enhanced self-other distinction, or if these postulated deficits are likely related to general inhibitory control abilities. Thus, Study 2 has the following goals: - Examine the associations between self-other distinction (indexed by imitation-inhibition) and psychopathy traits operationalized using different conceptual frameworks (triarchic model, classical 2-factor models, 4 facets model). - Investigate whether the associations between self-other distinction and psychopathy are independent or not from broader inhibitory control abilities (indexed by non-imitative inhibitory control). - Explore the complex interplay between psychopathy, empathy, interoception, and alexithymia.

Abusive experiences in childhood are common and can have effects on health and well-being that can last for many years, including altering the interpersonal behavior. There is also evidence showing that these early negative experiences may cause alteration in sensory modulation. This study aimed to understand if sensory over-responsivity (SOR) may play an important role in mediating the association between childhood abuse (Emotional Abuse, Emotional Neglect, Sexual Abuse, Physical Abuse, Physical Neglect) and Attachment-related Anxiety and Avoidance in adult romantic relationships. The sample consisted of 500 individuals aged 18-62 years (M= 28.83, SD = 7.82). Participants in this study completed an online survey, which contained the following instruments: Sensory Processing Scale Inventory (SPSI), Childhood Trauma Questionnaire (CTQ-SF), and Experiences in Close Relationships Questionnaire (ECR). The proposed mediation models have a higher mediation percentage for attachment-related anxiety rather than avoidance. All variables predicted the mediator, except sexual abuse that predicts the outcome but did not predict the overall model when the mediator was included.