The tripartite structure of pain-related affect: a confirmatory factor analysis

Attentional Biases Towards Body Expressions of Pain in Men and Women

This study investigated whether there are gender differences in attention to bodily expressions of pain and core emotions. Three experiments are reported using the attentional dot probe task. Images of men and women displaying bodily expressions, including pain, were presented. The task was used to determine whether participants' attention was drawn towards or away from target expressions. Inconsistent evidence was found for an attentional bias towards body expressions, including pain. While biases were affected by gender, patterns varied across the Experiments. Experiment 1, which had a presentation duration of 500 ms, found a relative bias towards the location of male body expressions compared to female expressions. Experiments 2 and 3 varied stimulus exposure times by including both shorter and longer duration conditions (e.g., 100 vs. 500 vs. 1250 ms). In these experiments, a bias towards pain was confirmed. Gender differences were also found, especially in the longer presentation conditions. Expressive body postures captured the attention of women for longer compared to men. These results are discussed in light of their implications for why there are gender differences in attention to pain, and what impact this has on pain behaviour. PERSPECTIVE: We show that men and women might differ in how they direct their attention towards bodily expressions, including pain. These results have relevance to understanding how carers might attend to the pain of others, as well as highlighting the wider role that social-contextual factors have in pain.

Missed targets, reaction times, and arousal are related to trait anxiety and attention to pain during an experimental vigilance task with a painful target

Although hypervigilance may play a role in some clinical pain syndromes, experimental vigilance toward painful stimuli has been studied infrequently. We evaluated vigilance toward pain by using a continuous performance task (CPT), in which subjects responded to moderately intense painful target stimuli, occurring in a train of mildly painful nontargets. We assessed nondetected targets (misses), reaction times (RTs), and psychological activation (tense arousal). During time on task in CPTs of other sensory modalities, there is an increase in misses and RTs (vigilance decrement). We hypothesized that our CPT would influence vigilance performance related to pain, anxiety, and limitation of attentional resources. The results showed a decrement in vigilance over time as misses increased, although RTs were unchanged. While mind-wandering did not influence vigilance performance, intrinsic attention to pain drove both hit RTs and number of misses. This resulted in pain-focused subjects performing worse on the CPT pain task with slower RTs and more misses per block. During the CPT, the change in stimulus salience was related to the change in pain intensity, while pain unpleasantness correlated with tense arousal. CPT performance during experimental vigilance to pain and psychological activation were related to trait anxiety, as measured by the Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory and neuroticism, as measured by the NEO five factor inventory. Trait anxiety and neuroticism may play important roles in an individual's predisposition to dwell on pain and interpret pain as threatening.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Subjects detected moderately painful target stimuli in a train of mildly painful nontarget stimuli, which resulted in vigilance performance metrics including missed targets, reaction times, and psychological activation. These performance metrics were related to intrinsic attention to pain and trait anxiety. Subjects with high trait anxiety and neuroticism scores, with a predisposition to attend to pain, had greater tense arousal and poorer vigilance performance, which may be important psychological aspects of vigilance to pain.

Threat Prediction from Schemas as a Source of Bias in Pain Perception

Our sensory impressions of pain are generally thought to represent the noxious properties of an agent but can be influenced by the predicted level of threat. Predictions can be sourced from higher-order cognitive processes, such as schemas, but the extent to which schemas can influence pain perception relative to bottom-up sensory inputs and the underlying neural underpinnings of such a phenomenon are unclear. Here, we investigate how threat predictions generated from learning a cognitive schema lead to inaccurate sensory impressions of the pain stimulus. Healthy male and female participants first detected a linear association between cue values and stimulus intensity and rated pain to reflect the linear schema when compared with uncued heat stimuli. The effect of bias on pain ratings was reduced when prediction errors (PEs) increased, but pain perception was only partially updated when measured against stepped increases in PEs. Cognitive, striatal, and sensory regions graded their responses to changes in predicted threat despite the PEs (p < 0.05, corrected). Individuals with more catastrophic thinking about pain and with low mindfulness were significantly more reliant on the schema than on the sensory evidence from the pain stimulus. These behavioral differences mapped to variability in responses of the striatum and ventromedial prefrontal cortex. Thus, this study demonstrates a significant role of higher-order schemas in pain perception and indicates that pain perception is biased more toward predictions and less toward nociceptive inputs in individuals who report less mindfulness and more fear of pain.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT This study demonstrates that threat predictions generated from cognitive schemas continue to influence pain perception despite increasing prediction errors arising in pain pathways. Individuals first formed a cognitive schema of linearity in the relationship between the cued threat value and the stimulus intensity. Subsequently, the linearity was reduced gradually, and participants partially updated their evaluations of pain in relation to the stepped increases in prediction errors. Individuals who continued to rate pain based more on the predicted threat than on changes in nociceptive inputs reported high pain catastrophizing and less mindful-awareness scores. These two affects mapped to activity in the ventral and dorsal striatum, respectively. These findings direct us to a significant role of top-down processes in pain perception.