Individual and interpersonal emotion regulation among adults with substance use disorders and matched controls.

OBJECTIVES: Self-report studies show that negative emotional states and ineffective use of emotion regulation strategies are key maintaining factors of substance use disorders (SUD). However, experimental research into emotional processing in adults with SUD is in its infancy. Theoretical conceptualizations of emotion regulation have shifted from a focus on individual (internal) processes to one that encompasses social and interpersonal functions - including the regulation of facial expression of emotion. The purpose of this study was to examine the individual and interpersonal emotion regulation capacity of 35 adults in residential treatment diagnosed with a SUD compared to 35 demographically matched controls (both samples Mage  = 25 years; 37% females). DESIGN AND METHODS: Participants completed a facial emotion expression flexibility task while viewing emotive images, as well as the Difficulties of Emotion Regulation Scale (DERS) and the Social (Emotion) Expectancy Scale (SES). RESULTS: Adults in SUD treatment experienced significantly more emotion regulation difficulties on all DERS subscales than controls. They also reported higher levels of negative self-evaluation and social expectancies not to feel negative emotions (anxiety and depression) compared to controls. Moreover, when viewing emotive images, the treatment sample showed significantly less flexibility of their emotional expression compared to the control sample. CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrate that the awareness, expression, and regulation of emotions are particularly difficult for people with SUD and this may maintain their substance use and provide an important target for treatment. PRACTITIONER POINTS: Compared to matched controls, adults with substance use disorders self-report significantly more difficulties with emotional awareness and regulation. Compared to matched controls, adults with substance use disorders report significantly greater expectancies not to show depression and anxiety. When viewing positive and negative images, adults with substance use disorders are significantly less flexible in their facial expression of emotion than matched controls in response to regulatory instructions. Emotion regulation should be measured and addressed as part of substance use disorder treatment.

Enhanced sensitization to animal, interpersonal, and intergroup fear-relevant stimuli (but no evidence for selective one-trial fear learning).

Selective sensitization has been proposed as an alternative explanation for enhanced responding to animal fear-relevant stimuli--snakes and spiders--during extinction of Pavlovian fear conditioning. The current study sought to replicate the phenomenon using a shock workup procedure as the sensitizing manipulation and to extend it to interpersonal and intergroup fear-relevant stimuli--angry faces and other-race faces. Assessment of selective sensitization was followed by a one-trial fear learning procedure. Selective sensitization, larger electrodermal responses to fear-relevant than to control stimuli after sensitization, or a larger increase in electrodermal responding to fear-relevant than to control stimuli after sensitization was observed across stimulus domains. However, the one-trial fear learning procedure failed to provide evidence for enhanced fear conditioning to fear-relevant stimuli. One-trial fear learning was either absent or present for fear-relevant and nonfear-relevant stimuli. The current study confirms that electrodermal responses to fear-relevant stimuli across stimulus domains are subject to selective sensitization.

Modality-specific attentional startle modulation during continuous performance tasks: a brief time is sufficient.

Attentional startle modulation has been found to be modality specific in continuous performance tasks (CPTs) and modality nonspecific in trial-structured tasks. Experiment 1 investigated whether attentional blink modulation in a CPT would change if a trial structure was imposed. Participants performed a visual CPT either continuously (CONT), or during brief periods of time signaled by a change in screen color with stimuli either presented all the time (MIXED) or only during the trial segments (DISC). Contrary to expectation, evidence for modality-specific attentional startle modulation-smaller acoustic startle during targets than during nontargets-was strongest in Groups MIXED and DISC. Experiment 2 confirmed that this pattern of results was present during the first stimulus of the task period in group DISC. This suggests that the continuous nature of a task is not critical in determining the attentional mechanisms engaged.

Startle blink facilitation during the go signal of a reaction time task is not affected by movement preparation or attention to the go signal.

Startle reflex eliciting stimuli presented at the onset of the go signal in a simple forewarned reaction time (RT) task (at a SOA of 0 ms) elicit larger blink reflexes than do stimuli presented later (e.g., at a SOA of 150 ms) or during inter trial intervals. The present study investigated whether this facilitation is affected by attention to the go signal or motor preparation. Participants performed a forewarned reaction time task that crossed the requirements for a speeded response (Hold versus Move) and for a discrimination task performed with the go signal (Report versus No report). Relative to control reflexes, blinks elicited at a SOA of 0 ms were facilitated and blinks elicited at a SOA of 150 ms were inhibited. RTs were slower on trials that required attention to the go signal and in both attention conditions and at both SOAs shortened in the presence of a blink-eliciting stimulus. However, neither attention to the go signal nor motor preparation affected blink facilitation at the 0 ms SOA. This finding suggests that the blink reflex facilitation observed at a SOA of 0 ms with the onset of a go signal reflects on the summation of sub- and supra-threshold activations of the startle pathway.