Nuts & Bolts Plan for Today
• Very brief cumulative review
• Lecture (Davidson & Gable papers)
• Take-home critical thinking questions
Moods, thoughts, and behavior are determined by
A. The situation
B. T&P
C. Both
Th
es
itu
h
0%
Bo
t
0%
T&
P
at
io
n
0%
Longitudinal research studies…
A.
ov
e
he
of
t
Al
l
ca
pr
ov
e
no
t
Ca
n
0%
ab
n,
...
us
a
nd
,a
ly
co
st
pl
ex
,
Co
m
0%
tio
t..
.
en
ce
ev
id
ng
tro
es
0%
ti m
...
0%
Pr
ov
id
Provide strong evidence that
antecedants (childhood) predict
consequences (adulthood), a
precondition for establishing
causation
B. Complex, costly, and timeconsuming
C. Can not prove causation,
because they do not
manipulate the putative cause
of the outcome
D. All of the above
The key take home point from Block’s
critique is that the FFM
fu
n
Is
a
an
sh
or
t-h
co
nv
e
th
Re
f le
ct
s
en
ie
nt
da
m
en
t
al
ho
o
of
nc
h
bu
0%
..
0%
...
ey
0%
Is
a
A. Is a bunch of hooey
B. Reflects the
fundamental nature
of T&P
C. Is a convenient
short-hand, a
sometimes useful
fiction that begs for
additional research
The Five Factor Model (FFM) is predicated on the ‘lexical
hypothesis,’ the assumption that the deep structure of T&P is
embedded in our natural language, waiting to be discovered.
What are some concerns with this assumption?
A.
ov
e
0%
ab
he
of
t
th
e
ar
an
te
gu
No
Al
l
m
ig
&P
of
T
ec
ts
sp
ya
Ke
0%
or
ds
...
ht
T.
.
of
ec
ts
sp
ng
fu
la
ea
ni
M
0%
..
0%
at
w
Meaningful aspects of T&P may not
be captured by single word
B. Key aspects of T&P might be too
complex for single words, requiring
phrases, sentences, or even whole
paragraphs of words
C. No guarantee that words (natural
language) will permit the expression
of scientifically crucial aspects of
personality
D. All of the above
PSYC 612:
What exactly do trait-like individual
differences in T&P do?
AJ Shackman
6 October 2014
Today’s Conceptual Roadmap
• What does T&P do?
• What does it mean to say that individuals differ in
terms of the brain’s reactivity to trait-relevant
cues and contexts?
• How does T&P influence our daily experience?
– Does it influence mood, exposure to rewards and
punishments, or both?
Today’s Conceptual Roadmap
• What does T&P do?
• What does it mean to say that individuals differ in
terms of the brain’s reactivity to trait-relevant
cues and contexts?
• How does T&P influence our daily experience?
– Does it influence mood, exposure to rewards and
punishments, or both?
Today’s Conceptual Roadmap
• What does T&P do?
• What does it mean to say that individuals differ in
terms of the brain’s reactivity to trait-relevant
cues and contexts?
• How does T&P influence our daily experience?
– Does it influence mood, exposure to rewards and
punishments, or both?
Today’s Conceptual Roadmap
• What does T&P do?
• What does it mean to say that individuals differ in
terms of the brain’s reactivity to trait-relevant
cues and contexts?
• How does T&P influence our daily experience?
– Does it influence mood, exposure to rewards and
punishments, or both?
First, some background
Two Ideas
T&P is ‘Active’ in the Absence of
External Challenge; Embodied in the
Ongoing Activity of the Brain
Two Ideas
Interaction (Tonic Activation) Model
Traits x Trait-Relevant Challenges  States
T&P is ‘Active’ in the Absence of
External Challenge; Embodied in the
Ongoing Activity of the Brain
Two Ideas
Interaction (Tonic Activation) Model
Traits x Trait-Relevant Challenges  States
T&P is ‘Active’ in the Absence of
External Challenge; Embodied in the
Ongoing Activity of the Brain
Core idea is that trait = bigger reaction in relevant brain systems
More trait, more “activation”
Hi Trait e.g. N/NE
Lo Trait e.g. N/NE
Bigger Peak Reactivity
But is it only a difference in the peak?
Hi Trait e.g. N/NE
Lo Trait e.g. N/NE
Bigger Peak Reactivity
Students?
What was
Richie’s perspective?
Not necessarily just the peak
Other parameters may be crucial
Not Necessarily the Peak
Hi Trait e.g. N/NE
Lo Trait e.g. N/NE
Recovery Time (Regulation/Decay)
“Mood Spillover”
Not Necessarily the Peak
Hi Trait e.g. N/NE
Lo Trait e.g. N/NE
Peak Amplitude
Recovery Time (Regulation/Decay)
“Mood Spillover”
Not Necessarily the Peak
Hi Trait e.g. N/NE
Lo Trait e.g. N/NE
Peak Amplitude
Rise Time to Peak
Recovery Time (Regulation/Decay)
“Mood Spillover”
Not Necessarily the Peak
Hi Trait e.g. N/NE
Lo Trait e.g. N/NE
Peak Amplitude
Rise Time to Peak
Threshold
Recovery Time (Regulation/Decay)
“Mood Spillover”
Not Necessarily the Peak
Hi Trait e.g. N/NE
Lo Trait e.g. N/NE
weak
Threshold
medium
strong
Hypothesized Brain Substrate for Behavioral Inhibition
Behaviorally inhibited children are
“born with a lower threshold for arousal of
various brain regions, in particular the amygdala”
-- New York Times Magazine piece on Jerry Kagan
Not Necessarily the Peak
Not Necessarily the Peak
React Recover
Not Necessarily the Peak
React Recover
A Second Example
A Second Example
Jenni Blackford
Vanderbilt
Amygdala
* Remember: behavioral inhibition is a facet of N/NE
Behaviorally inhibited subjects show…
Amygdala
…more enduring activation in the amygdala
to emotional faces.
There were not a significant difference in the
peak response.
* Remember: behavioral inhibition is a facet of N/NE
What about daily experience?
First, some theory
2 Fundamental Dimensions
Reward
Cues
Punishment
Cues
Behavior
Approach
(Passive) Avoidance
e.g., freezing, BI
Motivation
Appetitive
Aversive
Emotions
Excitement, Joy
(and Anger, when goals
are thwarted)
Substrate
Behavioral Activation
System (BAS)
Anxiety
“Wanting”
(Not “Liking” or pleasure)
Behavioral Inhibition
System (BIS)
2 Fundamental Dimensions
Reward
Cues
Punishment
Cues
Behavior
Approach
(Passive) Avoidance
e.g., freezing, BI
Motivation
Appetitive
Aversive
Emotions
Excitement, Joy
(and Anger, when goals
are thwarted)
Substrate
Behavioral Activation
System (BAS)
Anxiety
“Wanting”
(Not “Liking” or pleasure)
Behavioral Inhibition
System (BIS)
2 Fundamental Dimensions
Reward
Cues
Punishment
Cues
Behavior
Approach
(Passive) Avoidance
e.g., freezing, BI
Motivation
Appetitive
Aversive
Emotions
Excitement, Joy
(and Anger, when goals
are thwarted)
Substrate
Behavioral Activation
System (BAS)
Anxiety
“Wanting”
(Not “Liking” or pleasure)
Behavioral Inhibition
System (BIS)
2 Fundamental Dimensions
Reward
Cues
Punishment
Cues
Behavior
Approach
(Passive) Avoidance
e.g., freezing, BI
Motivation
Appetitive
Aversive
Emotions
Excitement, Joy
(and Anger, when goals
are thwarted)
Substrate
Behavioral Activation
System (BAS)
Anxiety
“Wanting”
(Not “Liking” or pleasure)
Behavioral Inhibition
System (BIS)
2 Fundamental Dimensions
Reward
Cues
Punishment
Cues
Behavior
Approach
(Passive) Avoidance
e.g., freezing, BI
Motivation
Appetitive
Aversive
Emotions
Excitement, Joy
(and Anger, when goals
are thwarted)
Substrate
Behavioral Activation
System (BAS)
Anxiety
“Wanting”
(Not “Liking” or pleasure)
Behavioral Inhibition
System (BIS)
2 Fundamental Dimensions
Reward
Cues
Punishment
Cues
Behavior
Approach
(Passive) Avoidance
e.g., freezing, BI
Motivation
Appetitive
Aversive
Emotions
Excitement, Joy
(and Anger, when goals
are thwarted)
Substrate
Behavioral Activation
System (BAS)
Anxiety
“Wanting”
(Not “Liking” or pleasure)
Behavioral Inhibition
System (BIS)
2 Fundamental Dimensions
Reward
Cues
Punishment
Cues
Behavior
Approach
(Passive) Avoidance
e.g., freezing, BI, caution,
risk assessment/vigilance
Motivation
Appetitive
Aversive
Emotions
Excitement, Joy
(and Anger, when goals
are thwarted)
Anxiety
Substrate
Behavioral Activation
System (BAS)
Behavioral Inhibition
System (BIS)
How do the BIS (punishment
sensitivity) and BAS (reward
sensitivity) map onto the consensual
model of T&P?
Students: Are they synonymous with
N/NE and E/PE?
Mapping to the Consensual Model: BIS
Caspi et al Ann Rev Psychol 2005
Neurobiology of BIS
Are individual differences in the BIS
discernible in the brain’s
activity at rest?
frontal EEG asymmetry and BIS
Right vs. Left
frontal EEG asymmetry and BIS
Right > Left
Trait Anxiety (BIS)
N = 51; p < .05, corr.
Shackman et al., 2009
Shackman et al., Psychol Sci, 2009
frontal EEG asymmetry
• Trait-like stability
• Heritable
• Correlated with self-reported trait anxiety (BIS,
STAI) and predicts threat-induced anxiety in adults
• Predicts threat-induced behavioral inhibition and
cortisol in children and monkeys
• Associated with anxiety disorders and ‘normalized’
by anxiolytic drugs
Right > Left
• Neurofeedback manipulations of resting
asymmetry can attenuate threat-induced anxiety
reviewed in Shackman et al., submitted; Nusslock, Shackman, Coan, Harmon-Jones, Alloy & Abramson, J Abnorm Psych, 2011
frontal EEG asymmetry
• Trait-like stability
• Heritable
• Correlated with self-reported trait anxiety (BIS,
STAI) and predicts threat-induced anxiety in adults
• Predicts threat-induced behavioral inhibition and
cortisol in children and monkeys
• Associated with anxiety disorders and ‘normalized’
by anxiolytic drugs
Right > Left
• Neurofeedback manipulations of resting
asymmetry can attenuate threat-induced anxiety
reviewed in Shackman et al., submitted; Nusslock, Shackman, Coan, Harmon-Jones, Alloy & Abramson, J Abnorm Psych, 2011
frontal EEG asymmetry
• Trait-like stability
• Heritable
• Correlated with self-reported trait anxiety (BIS,
STAI) and predicts threat-induced anxiety in adults
• Predicts threat-induced behavioral inhibition and
cortisol in children and monkeys
• Associated with anxiety disorders and ‘normalized’
by anxiolytic drugs
Right > Left
• Neurofeedback manipulations of resting
asymmetry can attenuate threat-induced anxiety
reviewed in Shackman et al., submitted; Nusslock, Shackman, Coan, Harmon-Jones, Alloy & Abramson, J Abnorm Psych, 2011
frontal EEG asymmetry
• Trait-like stability
• Heritable
• Correlated with self-reported trait anxiety (BIS,
STAI) and predicts threat-induced anxiety in adults
• Predicts threat-induced behavioral inhibition and
cortisol in children and monkeys
• Associated with anxiety disorders and ‘normalized’
by anxiolytic drugs
Right > Left
• Neurofeedback manipulations of resting
asymmetry can attenuate threat-induced anxiety
reviewed in Shackman et al., submitted; Nusslock, Shackman, Coan, Harmon-Jones, Alloy & Abramson, J Abnorm Psych, 2011
frontal EEG asymmetry
• Trait-like stability
• Heritable
• Correlated with self-reported trait anxiety (BIS,
STAI) and predicts threat-induced anxiety in adults
• Predicts threat-induced behavioral inhibition and
cortisol in children and monkeys
• Associated with anxiety disorders and ‘normalized’
by anxiolytic drugs
Right > Left
• Neurofeedback manipulations of resting
asymmetry can attenuate threat-induced anxiety
reviewed in Shackman et al., submitted; Nusslock, Shackman, Coan, Harmon-Jones, Alloy & Abramson, J Abnorm Psych, 2011
frontal EEG asymmetry
• Trait-like stability
• Heritable
• Correlated with self-reported trait anxiety (BIS,
STAI) and predicts threat-induced anxiety in adults
• Predicts threat-induced behavioral inhibition and
cortisol in children and monkeys
• Associated with anxiety disorders and ‘normalized’
by anxiolytic drugs
Right > Left
• Direct manipulations of resting EEG asymmetry
using neurofeedback can attenuate threatinduced anxiety
reviewed in Shackman et al., submitted; Nusslock, Shackman, Coan, Harmon-Jones, Alloy & Abramson, J Abnorm Psych, 2011
EEG source modeling
Shackman et al., 2009
estimated cortical current density
and BIS
N = 51; p < .05, corr.
Shackman et al., 2009
What about the BAS?
Mapping to the Consensual Model: BAS
Caspi et al Ann Rev Psychol 2005
Mapping to the Consensual Model: BAS
Caspi et al Ann Rev Psychol 2005
Mapping to the Consensual Model: BAS
Caspi et al Ann Rev Psychol 2005
frontal EEG asymmetry and BAS
L > R has been linked to …
• Individual differences in E/PE and BAS [at rest]
• Positive emotional states elicited by film clips
• Anger (thwarted or stymied approach)
• “Wanting” (appetitive drive) during the anticipation of
monetary reward in unselected Ss
• “Wanting” during the anticipation of smoking in
nicotine deprived smokers
• “Wanting” during the anticipation of mom’s return
following brief separation in young children
Left > Right
• Depressed (anhedonic) Pps show reduction at baseline
… more about this later!
frontal EEG asymmetry and BAS
L > R has been linked to …
• Individual differences in E/PE and BAS [at rest]
• Positive emotional states elicited by film clips
• Anger (thwarted or stymied approach)
• “Wanting” (appetitive drive) during the anticipation of
monetary reward in unselected Ss
• “Wanting” during the anticipation of smoking in
nicotine deprived smokers
• “Wanting” during the anticipation of mom’s return
following brief separation in young children
Left > Right
• Depressed (anhedonic) Pps show reduction at baseline
… more about this later!
frontal EEG asymmetry and BAS
L > R has been linked to …
• Individual differences in E/PE and BAS [at rest]
• Positive emotional states elicited by film clips
• Anger (thwarted or stymied approach)
• “Wanting” (appetitive drive) during the anticipation of
monetary reward in unselected Ss
• “Wanting” during the anticipation of smoking in
nicotine deprived smokers
• “Wanting” during the anticipation of mom’s return
following brief separation in young children
Left > Right
• Depressed (anhedonic) Pps show reduction at baseline
… more about this later!
frontal EEG asymmetry and BAS
L > R has been linked to …
• Individual differences in E/PE and BAS [at rest]
• Positive emotional states elicited by film clips
• Anger (thwarted or stymied approach)
• “Wanting” (appetitive drive) during the anticipation of
monetary reward in unselected Ss
• “Wanting” during the anticipation of smoking in
nicotine deprived smokers
• “Wanting” during the anticipation of mom’s return
following brief separation in young children
Left > Right
• Depressed (anhedonic) Pps show reduction at baseline
… more about this later!
frontal EEG asymmetry and BAS
L > R has been linked to …
• Individual differences in E/PE and BAS [at rest]
• Positive emotional states elicited by film clips
• Anger (thwarted or stymied approach)
• “Wanting” (appetitive drive) during the anticipation of
monetary reward in unselected Ss
• “Wanting” during the anticipation of smoking in
nicotine deprived smokers
• “Wanting” during the anticipation of mom’s return
following brief separation in young children
Left > Right
• Depressed (anhedonic) Pps show reduction at baseline
… more about this later!
frontal EEG asymmetry and BAS
L > R has been linked to …
• Individual differences in E/PE and BAS [at rest]
• Positive emotional states elicited by film clips
• Anger (thwarted or stymied approach)
• “Wanting” (appetitive drive) during the anticipation of
monetary reward in unselected Ss
• “Wanting” during the anticipation of smoking in
nicotine deprived smokers
• “Wanting” during the anticipation of mom’s return
following brief separation in young children
Left > Right
• Depressed (anhedonic) Pps show reduction at baseline
… more about this later!
frontal EEG asymmetry and BAS
L > R has been linked to …
• Individual differences in E/PE and BAS [at rest]
• Positive emotional states elicited by film clips
• Anger (thwarted or stymied approach)
• “Wanting” (appetitive drive) during the anticipation of
monetary reward in unselected Ss
• “Wanting” during the anticipation of smoking in
nicotine deprived smokers
• “Wanting” during the anticipation of mom’s return
following brief separation in young children
Left > Right
• Depressed (anhedonic) patients show reduction at
baseline (“resting EEG”)
depression
Reduced Left > Right
reviewed in Shackman et al., submitted; Nusslock, Shackman, Coan, Harmon-Jones, Alloy & Abramson, J Abnorm Psych, 2011
depression
FEA = frontal EEG asymmetry
Reduced Left > Right
reviewed in Shackman et al., submitted; Nusslock, Shackman, Coan, Harmon-Jones, Alloy & Abramson, J Abnorm Psych, 2011
BIS and BAS do not just reflect
activity in the prefrontal cortex (PFC)
More details in future lectures
Measuring individual differences
in BIS/BAS
Students—
How is the BIS/BAS scale supposed to
be different than other self-report
measures of T&P?
Most T&P Questionnaires
Please answer each of the following items based
on how you generally feel or how you typically
behave
I am generally anxious
From day to day, I tend to be
excited, proud, and confident
Most days, most of the time, I am worried
Theory: Sensitivity vs. Typical Experience
Carver & White JPSP 1994
Theory: Sensitivity vs. Typical Experience
Proneness; Not necessarily experience
“Gray characterized the quality of personality deriving from BIS sensitivity
as anxiety proneness [not anxiety having-ness]. This dimension appears
relatively straightforward conceptually.”
“The problem is that although a person with high BIS sensitivity is
vulnerable to anxiety in certain situations, this person may also learn to
avoid anxiety-provoking situation much of the time and consequently
experience relatively little anxiety on a day-to-day basis”
Behavior can change exposure to Rew/Pun and regulate daily emotion
“one who realized the vulnerability and arranged his or her life to avoid
threatening situations would not be especially prone to experience
negative affect moment to moment and thus would not have a high
standing on the Negative Emotionality scale.”
Carver & White JPSP 1994
Theory: Sensitivity vs. Typical Experience
Proneness; Not necessarily experience
“Gray characterized the quality of personality deriving from BIS sensitivity
as anxiety proneness [not anxiety having-ness]. This dimension appears
relatively straightforward conceptually.”
“The problem is that although a person with high BIS sensitivity is
vulnerable to anxiety in certain situations, this person may also learn to
avoid anxiety-provoking situation much of the time and consequently
experience relatively little anxiety on a day-to-day basis”
Behavior can change exposure to Rew/Pun and regulate daily emotion
“one who realized the vulnerability and arranged his or her life to avoid
threatening situations would not be especially prone to experience
negative affect moment to moment and thus would not have a high
standing on the Negative Emotionality scale.”
Carver & White JPSP 1994
Theory: Sensitivity vs. Typical Experience
Proneness; Not necessarily experience
“Gray characterized the quality of personality deriving from BIS sensitivity
as anxiety proneness [not anxiety having-ness]. This dimension appears
relatively straightforward conceptually.”
“The problem is that although a person with high BIS sensitivity is
vulnerable to anxiety in certain situations, this person may also learn to
avoid anxiety-provoking situation much of the time and consequently
experience relatively little anxiety on a day-to-day basis”
Behavior could change exposure to Rew/Pun, altering daily emotion
“one who realized the vulnerability and arranged his or her life to avoid
threatening situations would not be especially prone to experience
negative affect moment to moment and thus would not have a high
standing on the Negative Emotionality scale.”
Carver & White JPSP 1994
Theory: Sensitivity vs. Typical Experience
Proneness; Not necessarily experience
“Gray characterized the quality of personality deriving from BIS sensitivity
as anxiety proneness [not anxiety having-ness]. This dimension appears
relatively straightforward conceptually.”
“The problem is that although a person with high BIS sensitivity is
vulnerable to anxiety in certain situations, this person may also learn to
avoid anxiety-provoking situation much of the time and consequently
experience relatively little anxiety on a day-to-day basis”
Behavior could change exposure to Rew/Pun, altering daily emotion
“one who realized the vulnerability and arranged his or her life to avoid
threatening situations would not be especially prone to experience
negative affect moment to moment and thus would not have a high
standing on the Negative Emotionality scale.”
What does T&P do? Alters exposure via biases in approach and avoidance
Carver & White JPSP 1994
Theory: Sensitivity vs. Typical Experience
Proneness; Not necessarily experience
“Gray characterized the quality of personality deriving from BIS sensitivity
as anxiety proneness [not anxiety having-ness]. This dimension appears
relatively straightforward conceptually.”
“The problem is that although a person with high BIS sensitivity is
vulnerable to anxiety in certain situations, this person may also learn to
avoid anxiety-provoking situation much of the time and consequently
experience relatively little anxiety on a day-to-day basis”
Behavior could change exposure to Rew/Pun, altering daily emotion
“one who realized the vulnerability and arranged his or her life to avoid
threatening situations would not be especially prone to experience
negative affect moment to moment and thus would not have a high
standing on the Negative Emotionality scale.”
What does T&P do? Alters exposure via biases in approach and avoidance
Carver & White JPSP 1994
Is this theory true?
Does it apply equally
to the BIS (avoid punishments)
and BAS (approach rewards)?
Daily Diary
Gable’s data support
3 key conclusions
Traits  States
Traits predict mood
• Higher BAS  Increased daily PA
• Higher BIS  Increased daily NA
•
Consistent with the evidence reviewed in the Matthews
chapter indicating that Traits promote Trait-related States
Traits  States
Traits predict mood
• Higher BAS  Increased daily PA
• Higher BIS  Increased daily NA
•
Consistent with the evidence reviewed in the Matthews
chapter indicating that Traits promote Trait-related States
Traits  States
Traits predict mood
• Higher BAS  Increased daily PA
• Higher BIS  Increased daily NA
•
Consistent with the evidence reviewed in the Matthews
chapter indicating that Traits promote Trait-related States
High BIS  Enhanced Reactivity
BIS predicts reactivity to daily hassles and stress
• High-BIS individuals showed increased negative affect to
negative life events and daily hassles
• Experienced the same stressors as more distressing
• This was above and beyond their generally higher level
of negative affect
Reactivity
9
General Mood
7
5
High BIS
Low BIS
3
1
-1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
High BIS  Enhanced Reactivity
BIS predicts reactivity to daily hassles and stress
• High-BIS individuals showed increased negative affect to
negative life events and daily hassles
• Experienced the same stressors as more distressing
• This was above and beyond their generally higher level
of negative affect
Reactivity
9
General Mood
7
5
High BIS
Low BIS
3
1
-1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
High BIS  Enhanced Reactivity
BIS predicts reactivity to daily hassles and stress
• High-BIS individuals showed increased negative affect to
negative life events and daily hassles
• Experienced the same stressors as more distressing
• This was above and beyond their generally higher level
of negative affect
Reactivity
9
General Mood
7
5
High BIS
Low BIS
3
1
-1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
High BIS  Enhanced Reactivity
BIS predicts reactivity to daily hassles and stress
• High-BIS individuals showed increased negative affect to
negative life events and daily hassles
• Experienced the same stressors as more distressing
• This was above and beyond their generally higher level
of negative affect
Reactivity
9
General Mood
7
5
High BIS
Low BIS
3
1
-1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
High BAS  More Positive Events
BAS predicts more frequent positive daily events
9
7
5
High BAS
Low BAS
3
1
1
-1
2
3
4
5
6
7
High BAS  More Positive Events
BAS predicts more frequent positive daily events
9
7
5
High BAS
Low BAS
3
1
1
-1
2
3
4
5
6
7
High BAS  More Positive Events
More frequent positive daily events explained
increased PA in individuals with higher levels of BAS
More Positive Affect
Higher BAS
More Frequent
Positive Daily Events
High BAS  More Positive Events
More frequent positive daily events explained
increased PA in individuals with higher levels of BAS
More Positive Affect
Higher BAS
More Frequent
Positive Daily Events
In Summary
Trait BIS: Emotional States
• Influences NA (state) via differential reactivity to
negative events
• Reactive
Trait BAS: Behavior  Emotion
• Influences PA via differential exposure to positive
events
• Positive events may be less likely to occur without
active initiation
• Positive events must be sought out, and the BAS
regulates approach (appetitive motivation; wanting)
• Proactive
In Summary
Trait BIS: Emotional States
• Influences NA (state) via differential reactivity to
negative events
• Reactive
Trait BAS: Behavior  Emotion
• Influences PA via differential exposure to positive
events
• Positive events may be less likely to occur without
active initiation
• Positive events must be sought out, and the BAS
regulates approach (appetitive motivation; wanting)
• Proactive
In Summary
Trait BIS: Emotional States
• Influences NA (state) via differential reactivity to
negative events
• Reactive
Trait BAS: Behavior  Emotional States
• Influences PA via differential exposure to positive
events
• Positive events may be less likely to occur without
active initiation
• Positive events must be sought out, and the BAS
regulates approach (appetitive motivation; wanting)
• Proactive
In Summary
Trait BIS: Emotional States
• Influences NA (state) via differential reactivity to
negative events
• Reactive
Trait BAS: Behavior  Emotional States
• Influences PA via differential exposure to positive
events
• Positive events may be less likely to occur without
active initiation
• Positive events must be sought out, and the BAS
regulates approach (appetitive motivation; wanting)
• Proactive
In Summary
Trait BIS: Emotional States
• Influences NA (state) via differential reactivity to
negative events
• Reactive
Trait BAS: Behavior  Emotional States
• Influences PA via differential exposure to positive
events
• Positive events may be less likely to occur without
active initiation
• Positive events must be sought out, and the BAS
regulates approach (appetitive motivation; wanting)
• Proactive
In Summary
Trait BIS: Emotional States
• Influences NA (state) via differential reactivity to
negative events
• Reactive
Trait BAS: Behavior  Emotional States
• Influences PA via differential exposure to positive
events
• Positive events may be less likely to occur without
active initiation
• Positive events must be sought out, and the BAS
regulates approach (appetitive motivation; wanting)
• Proactive
In Summary
Trait BIS: Emotional States
• Influences NA (state) via differential reactivity to
negative events
• Reactive
Trait BAS: Behavior  Emotional States
• Influences PA via differential exposure to positive
events
• Positive events may be less likely to occur without
active initiation
• Positive events must be sought out, and the BAS
regulates approach (appetitive motivation; wanting)
• Proactive
Key Take Home Points
Key Take Home Points for Today’s Meeting
T&P—It ain’t just the peak amplitude
Key Take Home Points for Today’s Meeting
In prior lectures, we discussed evidence that T&P represents a diathesis that leads
to enhanced emotion in the presence of trait-relevant cues
Key Take Home Points for Today’s Meeting
Today, we reviewed evidence that T&P can also alter the probability of encountering
trait-relevant cues (rewards and punishments) in the environment
This demonstrates that traits can influence motivated behavior (approach and
avoidance)—even when emotionally-salient stimuli are absent
And it may reflect enduring differences in the spontaneous, on-going activity or
connectivity of the brain (EEG, FDG-PET, resting-state fMRI)
Key Take Home Points for Today’s Meeting
Today, we reviewed evidence that T&P can also alter the probability of encountering
trait-relevant cues (rewards and punishments) in the environment
This demonstrates that traits can influence motivated behavior (approach and
avoidance)—even when emotionally-salient stimuli are absent
And it may reflect enduring differences in the spontaneous, on-going activity or
connectivity of the brain (EEG, FDG-PET, resting-state fMRI)
Key Take Home Points for Today’s Meeting
Today, we reviewed evidence that T&P can also alter the probability of encountering
trait-relevant cues (rewards and punishments) in the environment
This demonstrates that traits can influence motivated behavior (approach and
avoidance)—even when emotionally-salient stimuli are absent
And it may reflect enduring differences in the spontaneous, on-going activity or
connectivity of the brain (EEG, FDG-PET, resting-state fMRI)
4 Critical Thinking Questions
Please respond to any 2
Critical Thinking Question #1
Critical Thinking Question #1
Contrary to Gable, other research indicates that
individuals with high levels of N/NE encounter
more frequent negative life events and daily
stressors (Magnus et al. 1993; Ormel & Wohlfarth,
1991; Affleck et al. 1994; Bolger & Schilling 1991;
Bolger & Zuckerman 1995; David et al 1997;
Gunthert et al 1999; Suls et al 1998).
Why didn’t Gable see this ‘differential exposure?’
Might it reflect the BIS/BAS scales?
Critical Thinking Question #1
Contrary to Gable, other research indicates that
individuals with high levels of N/NE encounter
more frequent negative life events and daily
stressors (Magnus et al. 1993; Ormel & Wohlfarth,
1991; Affleck et al. 1994; Bolger & Schilling 1991;
Bolger & Zuckerman 1995; David et al 1997;
Gunthert et al 1999; Suls et al 1998).
Why didn’t Gable see this ‘differential exposure?’
Might it reflect her use of the BIS/BAS scales?
The Scales
BIS
Even if something bad is about to happen to me, I rarely experience fear or nervousness.
I feel pretty worried or upset when I think or know somebody is angry at me.
If I think something unpleasant is going to happen I usually get pretty "worked up."
I feel worried when I think I have done poorly at something important.
I have very few fears compared to my friends.
I worry about making mistakes.
Criticism or scolding hurts me quite a bit.
Notice
1. Many of the items are focused on situations where overt threat is absent, distal, or
ambiguous
2. None directly indexes avoidance or inhibition, contrary to The Theory
BAS
I go out of my way to get things I want.
When I'm doing well at something I love to keep at it.
I'm always willing to try something new if I think it will be fun.
When I get something I want, I feel excited and energized.
When I want something I usually go all-out to get it.
I will often do things for no other reason than that they might be fun.
If I see a chance to get something I want I move on it right away.
When I see an opportunity for something I like I get excited right away.
I often act on the spur of the moment.
When good things happen to me, it affects me strongly.
I crave excitement and new sensations.
When I go after something I use a "no holds barred" approach.
It would excite me to win a contest.
Critical Thinking Question #2
Critical Thinking Question #2
In prior lectures, we have discussed the potential
limitations of introspective self-report measures of
T&P (e.g., insensitivity to processes that lie outside
of conscious awareness, biases, mnemonic
artifacts, mash-up readout).
To what degree might Gable’s results reflect traitlike differences in the way that people think about,
rate, appraise, or label their emotions and daily
experiences, rather than true differences in
emotional states or stress exposure? How might
one circumvent this in future research?
Critical Thinking Question #2
In prior lectures, we have discussed the potential
limitations of introspective self-report measures of
T&P (e.g., insensitivity to processes that lie outside
of conscious awareness, biases, mnemonic
artifacts, mash-up readout).
To what degree might Gable’s results reflect traitlike differences in the way that people think about,
rate, appraise, or label their emotions and daily
experiences, rather than true differences in
emotional states or stress exposure? How might
one circumvent this in future research?
Critical Thinking Question #3
Critical Thinking Question #3
Individuals characterized by low
BAS are vulnerable to depression
Low BAS
Increased p(MDD Dx)
Briefly describe why this might be so using the key
results from the Gable study. Briefly describe a
study that would allow you to test your hypothesis.
Watson Ann Rev Clin Psychol 2009
Critical Thinking Question #3
Individuals characterized by low
BAS are vulnerable to depression
Low BAS
Why ????
Increased p(MDD Dx)
Briefly describe why this might be so using the key
results from the Gable study. Briefly describe a
study that would allow you to test your hypothesis.
Watson Ann Rev Clin Psychol 2009
Critical Thinking Question #4
In prior lectures, we have discussed the potential
limitations of introspective self-report measures of
T&P (e.g., insensitivity to processes that lie outside
of conscious awareness, biases, mnemonic
artifacts, mash-up readout).
To what degree might Gable’s results reflect traitlike differences in the way that people think about,
rate, appraise, or label their emotions and daily
experiences, rather than true differences in
emotional states? How might one circumvent this
in future research?
Critical Thinking Question #4
Today, I suggested that BAS influences exposure to
positive events via approach behaviors
(e.g., attending or organizing a party)
Briefly describe another possible explanatory
mechanisms
For example, might high-BAS individuals evoke
more positive reactions from others?
Critical Thinking Question #4
Today, I suggested that BAS influences exposure to
positive events via approach behaviors
(e.g., attending or organizing a party)
Briefly describe another possible explanatory
mechanisms
For example, might high-BAS individuals evoke
more positive reactions from others?
The End
Stuff for Future Semesters
Clark & Watson (1991) synthesized the accumulating evidence into
their tripartite model of depression and anxiety. This model grouped
depression and anxiety symptoms into three basic subtypes. First,
many symptoms are strong indicators of a general distress or negative
affect factor. This nonspecific group includes both anxious and
depressed mood, as well as other symptoms that are prevalent in both
depression and anxiety. The other two symptom groups represent the
unique, distinguishing aspects of each syndrome: somatic hyperarousal
(e.g., shortness of breath, dizziness) is specific to anxiety, whereas
anhedonia and low positive mood (e.g., loss of interest, feeling that
nothing is enjoyable) are relatively specific to depression. Barlow and
his colleagues subsequently articulated a similar three-factor model
(Barlow et al. 1996, Chorpita et al. 1998).
Watson Ann Rev Clin Psychol 2009
Shackman et al., Psychol Sci, 2009
xx
The Trait-Like Phenotype
The interviewer asks Kagan’s Baby 19 [now 15 yrs]
what she worries about.
“I don’t know,” Baby 19
says after a long pause, twirling her hair faster,
touching her face, her knee. She smiles a little,
shrugs. Another pause. And then the list of
troubles spills out: “When I don’t quite know what
to do and it’s really frustrating and I feel really
uncomfortable, especially if other people around
me know what they’re doing. I’m always thinking,
Should I go here? Should I go there? Am I in
someone’s way? ... I worry about things like
getting projects done... I think, Will I get it done?
How am I going to do it? ... If I’m going to be in a
big crowd, it makes me nervous about what I’m
going to do and say and what other people are
going to do and say.” Baby 19 is wringing her hands
now. “How I’m going to deal with the world when
I’m grown. “
The Hypothesized Brain Substrate
“In the brain, these thoughts can often be traced
to overreactivity in the amygdala, a small site in the
middle of the brain that…responds to novelty and
threat. When the amygdala works as it should, it
orchestrates a physiological response to changes in
the environment. That response includes
heightened memory for emotional experiences and
the familiar chest pounding of fight or flight.
But in people born with a particular brain circuitry,
the kind seen in Kagan’s high-reactive study Ss, the
amygdala is hyperreactive, prickly as a haywire
motion-detector light that turns on when nothing’s
moving but the rain.”