注意线索对自闭特质个体疼痛共情的影响：来自事件相关电位的证据

删除或更新信息，请邮件至freekaoyan#163.com(#换成@)

本站小编 Free考研考试/2022-01-01

李雄¹^,², 李祚山², 向滨洋², 孟景¹^,²(

)

¹ 重庆市人文社科重点研究基地课程与教学研究基地
² 重庆师范大学应用心理学重点实验室, 重庆 401331

收稿日期:2019-09-27出版日期:2020-03-25发布日期:2020-01-18
通讯作者:孟景E-mail:qufumj@qq.com

基金资助:* 重庆市教委人文社会科学科研项目资助(19JD025)

Empathy for pain in Individuals with autistic traits influenced by attention cues: Evidence from an ERP study

LI Xiong¹^,², LI Zuoshan², XIANG Binyang², MENG Jing¹^,²(

)

¹ Chongqing Research Institute of Curriculum and Instruction, School of Education, Chongqing Normal University, Chongqing 401331, China
² Key Laboratory of Applied Psychology, Chongqing Normal University, Chongqing 401331, China

Received:2019-09-27Online:2020-03-25Published:2020-01-18
Contact:MENG Jing E-mail:qufumj@qq.com

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 自闭特质个体在日常生活中表现出共情缺损, 但其程度较自闭症谱系障碍个体低, 并且注意线索和特异性的面孔加工可能会影响他们的共情加工进程。因此, 本研究采用事件相关电位(ERP)技术, 以疼痛面孔图片作为刺激材料, 让自闭特质组和控制组分别完成疼痛判断任务(该任务中被试的注意指向疼痛线索)和吸引力判断任务(该任务中被试的注意不指向疼痛线索)。结果发现, 相比控制组, 自闭特质组在吸引力判断任务中疼痛面孔图片诱发的P3波幅更大, 而在疼痛判断任务中两组没有显著差异。这表明注意线索会影响自闭特质个体对他人疼痛面孔的共情反应, 当自闭特质个体不注意他人面孔的疼痛线索时, 其疼痛共情能力会减弱。

图/表 8

表1被试年龄与AQ分数信息表

组别	年龄(岁)					AQ分数
组别	最小值	最大值	M ± SD	t	p	最小值	最大值	M ± SD	t	p
自闭特质组 (男=15, 女=15)	18	23	20.20 ± 1.35	1.23	0.224	27	35	29.80 ± 2.09	31.81	< 0.001
控制组 (男=16, 女=14)	18	23	19.77 ± 1.38	1.23	0.224	9	15	13.03 ± 1.99	31.81	< 0.001

表1被试年龄与AQ分数信息表

组别	年龄(岁)					AQ分数
组别	最小值	最大值	M ± SD	t	p	最小值	最大值	M ± SD	t	p
自闭特质组 (男=15, 女=15)	18	23	20.20 ± 1.35	1.23	0.224	27	35	29.80 ± 2.09	31.81	< 0.001
控制组 (男=16, 女=14)	18	23	19.77 ± 1.38	1.23	0.224	9	15	13.03 ± 1.99	31.81	< 0.001

图1实验所用材料图片示例(左列为疼痛图片, 右列为非疼痛图片)

图1实验所用材料图片示例(左列为疼痛图片, 右列为非疼痛图片)

表2刺激材料评估数据(M ± SD)

项目名称	疼痛图片	非疼痛图片	t	p
疼痛程度	6.77 ± 0.24	1.50 ± 0.15	100.64	< 0.001
吸引力程度	3.60 ± 0.29	3.67 ± 0.50	-0.71	0.482
情绪效价	3.17 ± 0.16	3.39 ± 0.24	-4.29	< 0.001
情绪唤醒度	2.50 ± 0.17	2.45 ± 0.18	1.06	0.292

表2刺激材料评估数据(M ± SD)

项目名称	疼痛图片	非疼痛图片	t	p
疼痛程度	6.77 ± 0.24	1.50 ± 0.15	100.64	< 0.001
吸引力程度	3.60 ± 0.29	3.67 ± 0.50	-0.71	0.482
情绪效价	3.17 ± 0.16	3.39 ± 0.24	-4.29	< 0.001
情绪唤醒度	2.50 ± 0.17	2.45 ± 0.18	1.06	0.292

图2实验流程图(上行为疼痛判断任务实验流程, 下行为吸引力判断任务实验流程)

图2实验流程图(上行为疼痛判断任务实验流程, 下行为吸引力判断任务实验流程)

表3行为数据描述统计(M ± SD)

组别	图片类型	反应时		主观等级评分
组别	图片类型	疼痛判断任务	吸引力判断任务	疼痛程度	吸引力程度	情绪反应
自闭特质组	疼痛图片	793.81 ± 332.36	802.16 ± 146.36	5.53 ± 1.36	3.44 ± 1.07	5.64 ± 0.99
自闭特质组	非疼痛图片	763.97 ± 298.88	854.85 ± 213.89	1.85 ± 1.12	3.86 ± 1.28	5.12 ± 1.14
控制组	疼痛图片	780.48 ± 275.31	772.02 ± 134.04	5.75 ± 1.34	3.58 ± 0.81	5.70 ± 0.66
控制组	非疼痛图片	770.85 ± 281.18	779.73 ± 138.93	1.78 ± 1.20	3.85 ± 1.01	5.16 ± 0.63

表3行为数据描述统计(M ± SD)

组别	图片类型	反应时		主观等级评分
组别	图片类型	疼痛判断任务	吸引力判断任务	疼痛程度	吸引力程度	情绪反应
自闭特质组	疼痛图片	793.81 ± 332.36	802.16 ± 146.36	5.53 ± 1.36	3.44 ± 1.07	5.64 ± 0.99
自闭特质组	非疼痛图片	763.97 ± 298.88	854.85 ± 213.89	1.85 ± 1.12	3.86 ± 1.28	5.12 ± 1.14
控制组	疼痛图片	780.48 ± 275.31	772.02 ± 134.04	5.75 ± 1.34	3.58 ± 0.81	5.70 ± 0.66
控制组	非疼痛图片	770.85 ± 281.18	779.73 ± 138.93	1.78 ± 1.20	3.85 ± 1.01	5.16 ± 0.63

表4ERP数据方差分析结果

变量	N1			N170			P2			N2			P3			LPC
变量	F	p	η²_p	F	p	η²_p	F	p	η²_p	F	p	η²_p	F	p	η²_p	F	p	η²_p
组别	0.30	0.584	0.01	0.22	0.638	<0.001	0.45	0.506	0.01	0.81	0.373	0.01	2.77	0.102	0.05	0.49	0.486	0.01
图片类型	0.34	0.562	0.01	0.32	0.574	0.01	0.07	0.792	<0.001	0.01	0.935	<0.001	6.08	0.017	0.10	<0.001	0.949	<0.001
任务类型	0.04	0.836	<0.001	4.59	0.036	0.07	0.45	0.505	0.01	29.02	<0.001	0.33	4.21	0.045	0.07	38.80	<0.001	0.40
组别×图片类型	0.01	0.907	<0.001	1.49	0.227	0.03	0.87	0.356	0.02	<0.001	0.953	<0.001	0.72	0.398	0.01	0.72	0.400	0.01
组别×任务类型	0.01	0.937	<0.001	0.11	0.747	<0.001	<0.001	0.997	<0.001	0.31	0.577	0.01	0.36	0.553	0.01	0.30	0.589	0.01
图片类型×任务类型	0.11	0.740	<0.001	0.12	0.735	<0.001	0.48	0.490	0.01	0.06	0.801	<0.001	1.05	0.310	0.02	10.25	0.002	0.15
组别×图片类型×任务类型	1.42	0.238	0.02	10.90	0.002	0.16	10.05	0.002	0.15	3.47	0.067	0.06	12.64	0.001	0.18	11.98	0.001	0.17

表4ERP数据方差分析结果

变量	N1			N170			P2			N2			P3			LPC
变量	F	p	η²_p	F	p	η²_p	F	p	η²_p	F	p	η²_p	F	p	η²_p	F	p	η²_p
组别	0.30	0.584	0.01	0.22	0.638	<0.001	0.45	0.506	0.01	0.81	0.373	0.01	2.77	0.102	0.05	0.49	0.486	0.01
图片类型	0.34	0.562	0.01	0.32	0.574	0.01	0.07	0.792	<0.001	0.01	0.935	<0.001	6.08	0.017	0.10	<0.001	0.949	<0.001
任务类型	0.04	0.836	<0.001	4.59	0.036	0.07	0.45	0.505	0.01	29.02	<0.001	0.33	4.21	0.045	0.07	38.80	<0.001	0.40
组别×图片类型	0.01	0.907	<0.001	1.49	0.227	0.03	0.87	0.356	0.02	<0.001	0.953	<0.001	0.72	0.398	0.01	0.72	0.400	0.01
组别×任务类型	0.01	0.937	<0.001	0.11	0.747	<0.001	<0.001	0.997	<0.001	0.31	0.577	0.01	0.36	0.553	0.01	0.30	0.589	0.01
图片类型×任务类型	0.11	0.740	<0.001	0.12	0.735	<0.001	0.48	0.490	0.01	0.06	0.801	<0.001	1.05	0.310	0.02	10.25	0.002	0.15
组别×图片类型×任务类型	1.42	0.238	0.02	10.90	0.002	0.16	10.05	0.002	0.15	3.47	0.067	0.06	12.64	0.001	0.18	11.98	0.001	0.17

图3自闭特质组和控制组在不同条件下的波形图、地形图和条形图注：上图为两组被试对疼痛图片和非疼痛图片分别进行疼痛判断任务和吸引力判断任务时, 在Fz、Pz、PO7电极点上自闭特质组(上半部分)和控制组(下半部分)的波形图和地形图(左列), 以及条形图(右列)。4种条件下(对疼痛图片进行疼痛判断任务：黑色实线和黑色条形图; 对非疼痛图片进行疼痛判断任务：黑色虚线和横线条形图; 对疼痛图片进行吸引力判断任务：灰色实线和灰色条形图; 对非疼痛图片进行吸引力判断任务：灰色虚线和斜线条形图)的平均波幅差异性检验结果如条形图所示。用M ± SD表示条形图中的数据。地形图中黑色框标记的区域表示该成分所纳入分析的电极点。 ns表示没有显著差异, *表示p < 0.05, **表示p < 0.01, ***表示p < 0.001。

图4两组被试对疼痛和非疼痛图片的波形图、地形图和条形图注：上图为两组被试在Fz、Pz、PO7电极点上对疼痛图片(上半部分)和非疼痛图片(下半部分)分别进行疼痛判断任务和吸引力判断任务时的波形图和地形图(左列), 以及条形图(右列)。4种条件下(自闭特质组完成疼痛判断任务：黑色实线和黑色条形图; 控制组完成疼痛判断任务：黑色虚线和横线条形图; 自闭特质组完成吸引力判断任务：灰色实线和灰色条形图; 控制组完成吸引力判断任务：灰色虚线和斜线条形图)的平均波幅差异性检验结果如条形图所示。用M ± SD表示条形图中的数据。地形图中黑色框标记的区域表示该成分所纳入分析的电极点。 ns表示没有显著差异, *表示p < 0.05, ***表示p < 0.001。

参考文献 50

[1]	Adler N., Dvash J., & Shamay-Tsoory S. G . (2015). Empathic embarrassment accuracy in autism spectrum disorder. Autism Research, 8(3), 241-249. doi: 10.1002/aur.1439.
[2]	American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.
[3]	Baron-Cohen S . (2010). Empathizing, systemizing, and the extreme male brain theory of autism. Progress in Brain Research, 186(1), 167-175. doi: 10.1016/b978-0-444-53630-3.00011-7.
[4]	Baron-Cohen S., & Wheelwright S . (2004). The empathy quotient: An investigation of adults with asperger syndrome or high functioning autism, and normal sex differences. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 34(2), 163-175.
[5]	Baron-Cohen S., Wheelwright S., Skinner R., Martin J., & Clubley E . (2001). The autism-spectrum quotient (AQ): Evidence from asperger syndrome/high-functioning autism, males and females, scientists and mathematicians. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 31(1), 5-17.
[6]	Begeer S., Koot H. M., Rieffe C., Terwogt M. M., & Stegge H . (2008). Emotional competence in children with autism: Diagnostic criteria and empirical evidence. Developmental Review, 28(3), 342-369. doi: 10.1016/j.dr.2007.09.001.
[7]	Cheng J., Luo Y., & Cui F . (2017). Empathy for pain influenced by cognitive load: Evidence from an ERP study. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 49(5), 622-630. doi: 10.3724/sp.j.1041.2017.00622.
	[ 程家萍, 罗跃嘉, 崔芳 . (2017). 认知负荷对疼痛共情的影响: 来自ERP研究的证据. 心理学报, 49(5), 622-630.]
[8]	Chita-Tegmark M . (2016). Social attention in ASD: A review and meta-analysis of eye-tracking studies. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 48(1), 79-93. doi: 10.1016/j.ridd.2015.10.011.
[9]	Cui F., Ma N., & Luo Y.-J . (2016). Moral judgment modulates neural responses to the perception of other’s pain: An ERP study. Scientific Reports, 6(1), 1-8. doi: 10.1038/srep20851.
[10]	Decety J., Yang C. Y., & Cheng Y . (2010). Physicians down- regulate their pain empathy response: An event-related brain potential study. NeuroImage, 50(4), 1676-1682. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.01.025.
[11]	Delorme A., & Makeig S . (2004). EEGLAB: An open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 134(1), 9-21. doi: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2003.10.009.
[12]	Evers K., Steyaert J., Noens I., & Wagemans J . (2015). Reduced recognition of dynamic facial emotional expressions and emotion-specific response bias in children with an autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 45(6), 1774-1784. doi: 10.1007/s10803-014-2337-x.
[13]	Fan Y., & Han S . (2008). Temporal dynamic of neural mechanisms involved in empathy for pain: An event-related brain potential study. Neuropsychologia, 46(1), 160-173. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2007.07.023.
[14]	Fan Y.-T., Chen C., Chen S.-C., Decety J., & Cheng Y . (2014). Empathic arousal and social understanding in individuals with autism: Evidence from fMRI and ERP measurements. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 9(8), 1203-1213. doi: 10.1093/scan/nst101.
[15]	Gökçen E., Petrides K. V., Hudry K., Frederickson N., & Smillie L. D . (2014). Sub-threshold autism traits: The role of trait emotional intelligence and cognitive flexibility. British Journal of Psychology, 105(2), 187-199. doi: 10.1111/bjop.12033.
[16]	Gu X., & Han S . (2007). Attention and reality constraints on the neural processes of empathy for pain. NeuroImage, 36(1), 256-267. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.02.025.
[17]	Hagenmuller F., Rössler W., Wittwer A., & Haker H . (2014). Empathic resonance in asperger syndrome. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 8(7), 851-859. doi: 10.1016/j.rasd.2014.04.008.
[18]	Hasegawa N., Kitamura H., Murakami H., Kameyama S., Sasagawa M., Egawa J., .. Someya T . (2013). Neural activity in the posterior superior temporal region during eye contact perception correlates with autistic traits. Neuroscience Letters, 549(1), 45-50. doi: 10.1016/j.neulet.2013.05.067.
[19]	Hoekstra R. A., Vinkhuyzen A. A. E., Wheelwright S., Bartels M., Boomsma D. I., Baron-Cohen S., ... van der Sluis S . (2010). The construction and validation of an abridged version of the autism-spectrum quotient (AQ- short). Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 41(5), 589-596. doi: 10.1007/s10803-010-1073-0.
[20]	Hu Y., Abbasi N. u. H., Zhang Y., & Chen H . (2018). The effect of target sex, sexual dimorphism, and facial attractiveness on perceptions of target attractiveness and trustworthiness. Frontiers in Psychology, 9(1), 1-8. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00942.
[21]	Itier R. J., & Taylor M. J . (2002). Inversion and contrast polarity reversal affect both encoding and recognition processes of unfamiliar faces: A repetition study using ERPs. NeuroImage, 15(2), 353-372. doi: 10.1006/nimg.2001.0982.
[22]	Itier R. J., & Taylor M. J . (2004). N170 or N1? Spatiotemporal differences between object and face processing using ERPs. Cerebral Cortex, 14(2), 132-142. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhg111.
[23]	Jemel B., Mottron L., & Dawson M . (2006). Impaired face processing in autism: Fact or artifact? Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 36(1), 91-106. doi: 10.1007/s10803-005-0050-5.
[24]	Jones C. R., Pickles A., Falcaro M., Marsden A. J., Happe F., Scott S. K., .. Charman T . (2011). A multimodal approach to emotion recognition ability in autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 52(3), 275-285. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2010.02328.x.
[25]	Jung T. P., Makeig S., Westerfield M., Townsend J., Courchesne E., & Sejnowski T. J . (2001). Analysis and visualization of single-trial event-related potentials. Human Brain Mapping, 14(3), 166-185.
[26]	Key A. P., & Stone W. L . (2012). Same but different: Nine-month-old infants at average and high risk for autism look at the same facial features but process them using different brain mechanisms. Autism Research, 5(4), 253-266. doi: 10.1002/aur.1231.
[27]	Khorrami A., Tehrani-Doost M., & Esteky H . (2013). Comparison between face and object processing in youths with autism spectrum disorder: An event related potentials study. Iranian Journal of Psychiatry, 8(4), 179-187.
[28]	Lassalle A., & Itier R. J . (2014). Autistic traits influence gaze-oriented attention to happy but not fearful faces. Social Neuroscience, 10(1), 70-88. doi: 10.1080/17470919.2014.958616.
[29]	Lavie N., Hirst A., de Fockert J. W., & Viding E . (2004). Load theory of selective attention and cognitive control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133(3), 339-354. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.133.3.339.
[30]	Lawson J., Baron-Cohen S., & Wheelwright S . (2004). Empathising and systemising in adults with and without asperger syndrome. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 34(3), 301-310.
[31]	Liu M . (2008). Screening adults for asperger syndrome and high-functioning autism by using the autism-spectrum quotient (AQ) (mandarin version). Bulletin of Special Education, 33(1), 73-92.
	[ 刘萌容 . (2008). 自闭症光谱量表─autism-spectrum quotient中文成人版之预测效度及相关因素分析. 特殊教育研究学刊, 33(1), 73-92.]
[32]	Lord C., Risi S., Lambrecht L., Edwin H., Cook J., Bennett L., .. Rutter M . (2000). The autism diagnostic observation schedule-Generic: A standard measure of social and communication deficits associated with the spectrum of autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 30(3), 205-223.
[33]	Luo C., Burns E., & Xu H . (2017). Association between autistic traits and emotion adaptation to partially occluded faces. Vision Research, 133(1), 21-36. doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2016.12.018.
[34]	Luo S., Han X., Du N., & Han S . (2018). Physical coldness enhances racial in-group bias in empathy: Electrophysiological evidence. Neuropsychologia, 116(1), 117-125. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2017.05.002.
[35]	Ma W., & Zhu B . (2014). Emotional empathy in children with autism spectrum disorder: Evidence from biofeedback measurement and eye movements. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 46(4), 528-539. doi: 10.3724/sp.j.1041.2014.00528.
	[ 马伟娜, 朱蓓蓓 . (2014). 孤独症儿童的情绪共情能力及情绪表情注意方式. 心理学报, 46(4), 528-539.]
[36]	Mella N., Studer J., Gilet A. L., & Labouvie-Vief G . (2012). Empathy for pain from adolescence through adulthood: An event-related brain potential study. Frontiers in Psychology, 3(1), 1-9. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00501.
[37]	Meng J., Hu L., Shen L., Yang Z., Chen H., Huang X., & Jackson T . (2012). Emotional primes modulate the responses to others’ pain: An ERP study. Experimental Brain Research, 220(3-4), 277-286. doi: 10.1007/s00221-012-3136-2.
[38]	Meng J., Jackson T., Chen H., Hu L., Yang Z., Su Y., & Huang X . (2013). Pain perception in the self and observation of others: An ERP investigation. NeuroImage, 72(1), 164-173. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.01.024.
[39]	Meng J., Li Z., & Shen L . (2017). Responses to others' pain in adults with autistic traits: The influence of gender and stimuli modality. PloS One, 12(3), 1-12. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0174109.
[40]	Meng J., Shen L., Li Z., & Peng W . (2019a). Top-down attention modulation on the perception of others' vocal pain: An event-related potential study. Neuropsychologia, 133(1), 1-7. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2019.107177.
[41]	Meng J., Shen L., Li Z., & Peng W . (2019b). Top-down effects on empathy for pain in adults with autistic traits. Scientific Reports, 9(1), 1-13. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-44400-2.
[42]	Reed P., Lowe C., & Everett R . (2011). Perceptual learning and perceptual search are altered in male university students with higher autism quotient scores. Personality and Individual Differences, 51(6), 732-736. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2011.06.016.
[43]	Rossion B., & Jacques C . (2008). Does physical interstimulus variance account for early electrophysiological face sensitive responses in the human brain? Ten lessons on the N170. NeuroImage, 39(4), 1959-1979. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.10.011.
[44]	Scambler D. J., Hepburn S., Rutherford M. D., Wehner E. A., & Rogers S. J . (2007). Emotional responsivity in children with autism, children with other developmental disabilities, and children with typical development. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 37(3), 553-563. doi: 10.1007/s10803-006-0186-y.
[45]	Senju A . (2013). Atypical development of spontaneous social cognition in autism spectrum disorders. Brain and Development, 35(2), 96-101. doi: 10.1016/j.braindev.2012.08.002.
[46]	Singer T., & Lamm C . (2009). The social neuroscience of empathy. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1156(1), 81-96. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.04418.x.
[47]	Song J., Guo F., Zhang Z., Yuan S., Jin H., & Wang Y . (2016). Interpersonal distance influences on pain empathy: Friends priming effect. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 48(7), 833-844. doi: 10.3724/sp.j.1041.2016.00833.
	[ 宋娟, 郭丰波, 张振, 原胜, 金花, 王益文 . (2016). 人际距离影响疼痛共情:朋友启动效应. 心理学报, 48(7), 833-844.]
[48]	Sreenivasan K. K., Goldstein J. M., Lustig A. G., Rivas L. R., & Jha A. P . (2009). Attention to faces modulates early face processing during low but not high face discriminability. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 71(4), 837-846. doi: 10.3758/app.71.4.837.
[49]	Wagner J. B., Hirsch S. B., Vogel-Farley V. K., Redcay E., & Nelson C. A . (2013). Eye-tracking, autonomic, and electrophysiological correlates of emotional face processing in adolescents with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 43(1), 188-199. doi: 10.1007/s10803-012-1565-1.
[50]	Wang A. T., Lee S. S., Sigman M., & Dapretto M . (2007). Reading affect in the face and voice: Neural correlates of interpreting communicative intent in children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorders. Archives of General Psychiatry, 64(6), 698-708. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.64.6.698.