Cold and hot executive functions between high-level and low-level ruminant thinking individuals
10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-6554.2016.03.015
- VernacularTitle:高低反刍思维个体冷热执行功能特点的比较
- Author:
Xiao CHANGGEN
;
Jiang HUAIBIN
;
Lin KE
;
Wu YANYAN
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Rumiation;
Executive function;
Stroop effect;
Attentional bias
- From:
Chinese Journal of Behavioral Medicine and Brain Science
2016;25(3):262-266
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To explore the character of ruminant thinking individuals in cold executive functions(cool EF) and hot executive functions(hot EF).Methods According to the score of rumination response scale( RRS) ,17 low-level ruminant thinking individuals and 21 high-level ruminant thinking indi-viduals were screened out and finished the classic Stroop test.Results In the cool EF,it was consistent be-tween low-level and high-level ruminant thinking individuals for color naming task response time ((10.61± 23.20)ms vs (10.79±29.32)ms),and there was no significant difference in the classic Stroop test( t=0.21, P>0.05) .In the hot EF,the respone time of the low-level group was longer than that of high-level group on the positive and negative((-5.01±22.20)ms vs (-10.88±20.33)ms;(8.78±29.96)ms vs (-8.68±19.94) ms) ,and the main effect of the emotional Stroop interference scores between positive and negative words was highly significant(F=10.88, P<0.05) .The interactive effect of emotional Stroop interference scores of words × subjects was significant(F=5.70, P<0.05) .The simple effect tests showed that the emotional Stroop interfer-ence scores between high-level and low-level ruminant thinking subjects were significant in the negative group(F=4.69, P<0.05) .And it was also significant between positive and negative words in the low-level group(F=14.63, P<0.05).Conclusion Two types of subjects in the cold EF have no significant difference. High-level ruminant thinking individuals in the cold EF are normal,but impaired in the hot EF that meaning high-level ruminant thinking individuals had bias to negative emotion.These results provide new clues for the intervention of negative emotions caused by ruminants.
