Search

Background and aimsPrevious studies suggest that attentional bias and disengagement may vary as a function of Body Mass Index (BMI), most notably in a palatable food related context. Though this could indeed represent a food context specific effect, it could also represent a general reward related context effect. In addition, though mindfulness and stress have both been reported to affect attention, it is not yet clear whether these moderate the relationship between BMI and attention as a function of reward context. In the current study we addressed these questions. It was hypothesized that BMI would be positively associated with bias in a food context and money context relative to a neutral context. The inverse was expected for disengagement. It was expected that mindfulness would decrease these relationships and for stress the inverse was expected.MethodsIn the current online study, eighty-seven participants (24 males and 63 females; age: M = 30.1, SD = 8.3; BMI: M = 24.2, SD = 4.67), filled out questionnaires and completed a visuospatial cueing task measuring attention and disengagement of attention in a neutral, food-related, and money-related condition.ResultsThere was no association between BMI and attentional bias. Higher BMI was associated with faster responses to money pictures presented opposite to a cued location as compared to money pictures that did not follow a predictive cue. Our results do not support a clear moderating role of mindfulness and stress.Discussion and conclusionOur results imply faster processing and associated quicker responding to unanticipated reward-related stimuli in individuals with overweight or obesity.

Stop-signal tasks (SSTs) combined with human electro-cortical recordings (Event-Related Potentials, ERPs) have revealed mechanisms associated with successful stopping (relative to failed), presumably contributing to inhibitory control. The corresponding ERP signatures have been labeled stop N1 (+/- 100-ms latency), stop N2 (200 ms), and stop P3 (160-250 ms), and argued to reflect more proactive (N1) versus more reactive (N2, P3) mechanisms. However, stop N1 and stop N2, as well as latencies of stop-P3, appear to be quite inconsistent across studies. The present work addressed the possible influence of stop-signal salience, expecting high salience to induce clear stop N1s but reduced stop N2s, and short-latency stop P3s.Three SST varieties were combined with high-resolution EEG. An imperative visual (go) stimulus was occasionally followed by a subsequent (stop) stimulus that signalled to withhold the just initiated response. Stop-Signal Reaction Times (SSRTs) decreased linearly from visual-low to visual-high-salience to auditory. Auditory Stop N1 was replicated. A C1-like visual evoked potential (latency < 100 ms) was observed only with high salience, but not robustly associated with successful versus failed stops. Using the successful-failed contrast a visual stop-N1 analogue (112-156 ms post-stop-signal) was identified, as was right-frontal stop N2, but neither was sensitive to salience. Stop P3 had shorter latency for high than for low salience, and the extent of the early high-salience stop P3 correlated inversely with SSRT. These results suggest that salience-enhanced inhibitory control as manifest in SSRTs is associated with reactive rather than proactive electrocortical mechanisms.

Current research has reported the beneficial effects of mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) on general domains of cognition and behavior among children. The present study is the first meta-analysis with controlled studies investigating the pre-post change effects of MBIs on two widely experienced behaviors in childhood education, namely inattentiveness and hyperactivity–impulsivity. With a special developmental focus on the early years, a total of 21 studies with 3- to 12-year-old children were included in the meta-analysis. Results indicated that MBIs decreased children’s overall inattentive and hyperactive–impulsive behavior with a small but significant effect size ( k = 21, g+= .38, p < .001). However, this overall positive effect was only significant when teachers rated children’s behavior and nonsignificant when parents and children themselves were the informants. Additionally, MBIs showed a moderate effect in reducing inattentiveness and hyperactivity–impulsivity for children at risk for such behavior. In conclusion, results indicate that MBIs, which are relatively easily applied in educational practice, have the potential to decrease inattentive and hyperactive–impulsive behavior and might contribute to children’s overall better functioning at school.

Statistical learning is a universal learning mechanism and has been extensively studied in alphabetic languages, yet less explored in logographic language. The present study aimed to address this research gap and to assess the role of attention and inhibition in statistical learning. By applying a browser-based experiment tool, statistical learning was measured by an adapted statistical learning paradigm. Attention and inhibition were measured by the Go/No-Go task. 38 non-Chinese participants performed in the study. The results showed that accuracy and response speed was higher for characters with high occurrence probability relative to lower occurrence probability, but this was restricted to whole characters. Our results did not support a significant role of sustained attention and inhibition in relation to task performance. Our findings suggest that statistical learning is a general mechanism underlying Chinese character recognition.

OBJECTIVE: In the current study, we investigated the role of noradrenaline in directing (bias) and disengagement of visuospatial attention. METHODS: We assessed the effect of clonidine on event-related brain potential (ERP) reflections of bias and disengagement in a double-blind placebo-controlled crossover design. An initial dose of 200-μg clonidine was replaced by 100 μg because of marked side effects. Twenty-one healthy male participants performed the visual-spatial cueing task while an electroencephalogram (EEG) was recorded. The behavioral output is the validity effect (benefit of cueing in terms of reaction time to targets). ERP indices for bias were the cue-related early directing attention negativity and late directing attention positivity, and the target-elicited P1 and N1 modulations by validity ('validity-effect'). The ERP index for disengagement was the target-elicited 'late positive deflection' modulation by validity. Behavioral analyses were performed on 16 participants, electrophysiological analyses on a subset (n=9). RESULTS: Clonidine attenuated the N1 effect, albeit in a subsample. Neither cue-elicited ERPs nor the behavioral validity effect were affected. Clonidine-induced blood pressure reduction was correlated with the reduction of the late positive deflection effect under clonidine. CONCLUSION: Clonidine attenuated the result of bias in a subsample and may have a modulating effect on disengagement.

Understanding the neuropharmacology of inhibition is of importance to fuel optimal treatment for disorders such as Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder. The aim of the present study was to assess the effect of noradrenergic antagonism by clonidine on behavioral-performance and brain-activity indices of inhibition. A placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized, crossover design was implemented. Male (N = 21) participants performed in a visual stop signal task while EEG was recorded under clonidine in one session and under placebo in another. We expected that 100 μg clonidine would have a negative effect on EEG indices of inhibition, the Stop N2 and Stop P3. Furthermore, we expected that clonidine would negatively affect the behavioral measure of inhibition, the stop signal reaction time (SSRT). Behavioral analyses were performed on data of 17 participants, EEG analyses on a subset (N = 13). Performance data suggested that clonidine negatively affected attention (response variability, omissions) without affecting inhibition as indexed by SSRT. Electrophysiological data show that clonidine reduced the Stop P3, but not the Stop N2, indicating a partial negative effect on inhibition. Results show that it is unlikely that the Stop P3 reduction was related to the effect of clonidine on lapses of attention and on peripheral cardiovascular functioning. In conclusion, the current dose of clonidine had a negative effect on attention and a partial effect on inhibitory control. This inhibitory effect was restricted to the dorsal region of the prefrontal cortex (presumably the superior frontal gyrus) as opposed to the ventral region of the prefrontal cortex (right inferior frontal gyrus).

Contains fulltext : 88911.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access) EEG-feedback, also called neurofeedback, is a training procedure aimed at altering brain activity, and is used as a treatment for disorders like Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). Studies have reported positive effects of neurofeedback on attention and other dependent variables. However, double-blind studies including a sham neurofeedback control group are lacking. The inclusion of such group is crucial to control for unspecific effects. The current work presents a sham-controlled, double-blind evaluation. The hypothesis was that neurofeedback enhances attention and decreases impulsive behavior. Participants (n=27) were students selected on relatively high scores on impulsivity/inattention questionnaires (Barrat Impulsivity Scale and Broadbent CFQ). They were assigned to a neurofeedback treatment or a sham group. (sham)Neurofeedback training was planned for 15 weeks consisting of a total of 30 sessions, each lasting 22 min. Before and after 16 sessions (i.e., interim analyses), qEEG was recorded and impulsivity and inattention was assessed using a stop signal task and reversed continuous performance task and two questionnaires. Results of the interim analyses showed that participants were blind with respect to group inclusion, but no trend towards an effect of neurofeedback on behavioral measures was observed. Therefore in line with ethical guidelines the experiment was ceased. These results implicate a possible lack of effect of neurofeedback when one accounts for non-specific effects. However, the specific form of feedback and application of the sham-controlled double-blind design may have diminished the effect of neurofeedback.