4.7 Article

Computational modelling of attentional selectivity in depression reveals perceptual deficits

期刊

PSYCHOLOGICAL MEDICINE
卷 52, 期 5, 页码 904-913

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S0033291720002652

关键词

Cognitive control; cognitive modelling; depression

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigates the attentional selectivity performance of individuals with depression in flanker tasks using two computational models. The findings suggest that individuals with depression have deficits in perceptual representations, potentially exacerbating control deficits.
Background Depression is associated with broad deficits in cognitive control, including in visual selective attention tasks such as the flanker task. Previous computational modelling of depression and flanker task performance showed reduced pre-potent response bias and reduced executive control efficiency in depression. In the current study, we applied two computational models that account for the full dynamics of attentional selectivity. Method Across three large-scale online experiments (one exploratory experiment followed by two confirmatory - and pre-registered - experiments; total N = 923), we measured attentional selectivity via the flanker task and obtained measures of depression symptomology as well as anhedonia. We then fit two computational models that account for the dynamics of attentional selectivity: The dual-stage two-phase model, and the shrinking spotlight (SSP) model. Results No behavioural measures were related to depression symptomology or anhedonia. However, a parameter of the SSP model that indexes the strength of perceptual input was consistently negatively associated with the magnitude of depression symptomatology. Conclusions The findings provide evidence for deficits in perceptual representations in depression. We discuss the implications of this in relation to the hypothesis that perceptual deficits potentially exacerbate control deficits in depression.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据