Skip to main content
Log in

The temporal dynamics of attention: Thinking about oneself comes at a cost in sub-clinical depression but not in healthy participants

  • Published:
Current Psychology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Self-relevant stimuli seem to automatically draw attention, but it is unclear whether this comes at a cost for processing subsequent stimuli, and whether the effect is depending on one’s mental state (i.e. depression). To address this question, we performed two experiments. In Experiment 1, 45 participants were to report two words (T1 and T2) in an attentional blink (AB) paradigm. T1 was a personality characteristic varying in self-rated self-relevance, whereas T2 was a neutral word. A generalized linear mixed model (GLMM) was applied to compare the T1 and T2 accuracies when T1 was high or low self-relevant. A positive effect of self-relevance was found on T1, without observable carry-over effects on T2 performance. However, in Experiment 2, a GLMM applied on 93 participants showed that T1 self-relevance can affect T2, showing opposite effects depending on sub-clinical depression score. Our findings imply that people with low depression scores process self-relevant stimuli more efficiently, which is reflected in a reduced AB. In contrast, individuals with higher scores in depression demonstrated a difficulty to withdraw attention from self-relevant information, reflected in an increased AB. Our findings thus reveal that a processing advantage for highly self-relevant stimuli comes at either a subsequent cost or benefit in temporal attention depending on one’s mental disposition.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

All data in this study are available upon request by contact with the corresponding author, in consideration of data protection, a formal data sharing agreement is needed when the data is requested.

Code Availability

The data in this study was analyzed by custom code in matlab. It is available upon request by contact with the corresponding author.

Notes

  1. Pinyin, is the official Romanization system for Standard Chinese in mainland China and to some extent in Taiwan. It is normally written using Chinese characters. Pinyin can be used to spell Chinese names and words in languages written with the Latin alphabet and also in certain computer input methods to enter Chinese characters.

  2. A-level is the highest level of the Putonghua language proficiency test, with a score of 92 or higher out of 100. The test assesses pronunciation, intonation, natural intonation and smooth expression during reading and free conversation.

References

  • Agresti, A., & Coull, B. A. (1998). Approximate is better than “exact” for interval estimation of binomial proportions. The American Statistician, 52(2), 119–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alexopoulos, T., Muller, D., Ric, F., & Marendaz, C. (2012). I, me, mine: Automatic attentional capture by self-related stimuli. European Journal of Social Psychology, 42(6), 770–779.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Association, A. P. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental health disorders: DSM-5: Washington. American Psychiatric Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bargh, J. A. (1982). Attention and automaticity in the processing of self-relevant information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43(3), 425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bargh, J. A., & Pratto, F. (1986). Individual construct accessibility and perceptual selection. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22(4), 293–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beck, A. T., & Beck, R. W. (1972). Screening depressed patients in family practice: A rapid technic. Postgraduate Medicine, 52(6), 81–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Beck, A. T., Steer, R. A., & Carbin, M. G. (1988). Psychometric properties of the Beck Depression Inventory: Twenty-five years of evaluation. Clinical Psychology Review, 8(1), 77–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bola, M., Paz, M., Doradzinska, Ł., & Nowicka, A. (2021). The selfface captures attention without consciousness: Evidence from the N2pc ERP component analysis. Psychophysiology, 58

  • Cunningham, S. J., Turk, D. J., Macdonald, L. M., & Macrae, C. N. (2008). Yours or mine? Ownership and memory. Consciousness and Cognition, 17(1), 312–318.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • DiCiccio, C. J., & Romano, J. P. (2017). Robust permutation tests for correlation and regression coefficients. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 112(519), 1211–1220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dowle, M., & Srinivasan, A. (2017). data. table: Extension of ‘data. frame’. R package version 1.10. 4–3.

  • Furlanetto, L. M., Mendlowicz, M. V., & Bueno, J. R. (2005). The validity of the Beck Depression Inventory-Short Form as a screening and diagnostic instrument for moderate and severe depression in medical inpatients. Journal of Affective Disorders, 86(1), 87–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Figueroa, C. A., Ruhé, H. G., Koeter, M. W., Spinhoven, P., Van der Does, W., Bockting, C. L., & Schene, A. H. (2015). Cognitive reactivity versus dysfunctional cognitions and the prediction of relapse in recurrent major depressive disorder. The Journal of clinical psychiatry76(10), 0–0.

  • Gibb, B. E., Alloy, L. B., Abramson, L. Y., Rose, D. T., Whitehouse, W. G., Donovan, P., et al. (2001). History of childhood maltreatment, negative cognitive styles, and episodes of depression in adulthood. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 25(4), 425–446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gronau, N., Cohen, A., & Ben-Shakhar, G. (2003). Dissociations of personally significant and task-relevant distractors inside and outside the focus of attention: A combined behavioral and psychophysiological study. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132(4), 512.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hautzinger, M., Bailer, M., Worall, H., & Keller, F. (1994). Beck-depressions-inventar (BDI). Huber.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ingram, R. E. (1990). Self-focused attention in clinical disorders: Review and a conceptual model. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 156.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kaiser, R. H., Snyder, H. R., Goer, F., Clegg, R., Ironside, M., & Pizzagalli, D. A. (2018). Attention bias in rumination and depression: Cognitive mechanisms and brain networks. Clinical Psychological Science, 6(6), 765–782.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Koster, E. H., De Lissnyder, E., Derakshan, N., & De Raedt, R. (2011). Understanding depressive rumination from a cognitive science perspective: The impaired disengagement hypothesis. Clinical Psychology Review, 31(1), 138–145.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B., & Christensen, R. H. B. (2015). lmerTest: tests in linear mixed effects models. R package version 2.0–20. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.

  • Lenth, R., Singmann, H., Love, J., Buerkner, P., & Herve, M. (2018). Emmeans: Estimated marginal means, aka least-squares means. R Package Version, 1(1), 3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martens, S., Johnson, A., Bolle, M., & Borst, J. (2009). A quick visual mind can be a slow auditory mind: Individual differences in attentional selection across modalities. Experimental Psychology, 56(1), 33–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Martens, S., Dun, M., Wyble, B., & Potter, M. C. (2010a). A quick mind with letters can be a slow mind with natural scenes: Individual differences in attentional selection. PLoS One, 5(10), e13562.

  • Martens, S., Kandula, M., & Duncan, J. (2010b). Restricted attentional capacity within but not between modalities: An individual differences approach. PLoS ONE, 5(12), e15280.

  • Martens, S., Korucuoglu, O., Smid, H. G., & Nieuwenstein, M. R. (2010c). Quick minds slowed down: Effects of rotation and stimulus category on the attentional blink. PLoS One, 5(10), e13509.

  • Martens, S., Wierda, S. M., Dun, M., de Vries, M., & Smid, H. G. (2015). Musical minds: attentional blink reveals modality-specific restrictions. Plos One, 10(2), e0118294.

  • Martens, S., & Wyble, B. (2010). The attentional blink: Past, present, and future of a blind spot in perceptual awareness. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 34(6), 947–957.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moray, N. (1959). Attention in dichotic listening: Affective cues and the influence of instructions. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 11(1), 56–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, A. S., Brozovich, F. A., Lakhan-Pal, S., Jazaieri, H., Goldin, P. R., Heimberg, R. G., & Gross, J. J. (2016). Attentional blink impairment in social anxiety disorder: Depression comorbidity matters. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 50, 209–214.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McIvor, L., Sui, J., Malhotra, T., Drury, D., & Kumar, S. (2021). Self-referential processing and emotion context insensitivity in major depressive disorder. European Journal of Neuroscience, 53(1), 311–329.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nejad, A. B., Rotgé, J. Y., Valabregue, R., Guérin-Langlois, C., Hoertel, N., Gorwood, P., & Lemogne, C. (2019). Medial prefrontal disengagement during self-focus in formerly depressed patients prone to rumination. Journal of Affective Disorders, 247, 36–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Raymond, J. E., Shapiro, K. L., & Arnell, K. M. (1992). Temporary suppression of visual processing in an RSVP task: An attentional blink? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18(3), 849.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, M. S., & Alloy, L. B. (2003). Negative cognitive styles and stress-reactive rumination interact to predict depression: A prospective study. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 27(3), 275–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Röer, J. P., & Cowan, N. (2021). A preregistered replication and extension of the cocktail party phenomenon: One’s name captures attention, unexpected words do not. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 47(2), 234.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Romens, S. E., MacCoon, D. G., Abramson, L. Y., & Pollak, S. D. (2011). Cognitive style moderates attention to attribution-relevant stimuli. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 35(2), 134–141.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Ruz, M., & Lupianez, J. (2002). Attentional capture and exogenous orienting: Upon their automaticity and sensitivity to endogenous control. Psicologica, 23, 283–309.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, K. L., Hanslmayr, S., Enns, J. T., & Lleras, A. (2017). Alpha, beta: The rhythm of the attentional blink. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 24(6), 1862–1869.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stelmach, J. (2012). Using Permutation Tests in Multiple Correlation Investigation.

  • Sui, J., He, X., & Humphreys, G. W. (2012). Perceptual effects of social salience: Evidence from self-prioritization effects on perceptual matching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38, 1105–1117.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sui, J., Liu, M., Mevorach, C., & Humphreys, G. W. (2015). The salient self: The left intraparietal sulcus responds to social as well as perceptual-salience after self-association. Cerebral Cortex, 25(4), 1060–1068.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Taatgen, N. A., Juvina, I., Schipper, M., Borst, J. P., & Martens, S. (2009). Too much control can hurt: A threaded cognition model of the attentional blink. Cognitive Psychology, 59(1), 1–29.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tacikowski, P., Berger, C. C., & Ehrsson, H. H. (2017a). Dissociating the neural basis of conceptual self-awareness from perceptual awareness and unaware self-processing. Cerebral Cortex, 27(7), 3768–3781.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tacikowski, P., Freiburghaus, T., & Ehrsson, H. H. (2017b). Goal-directed processing of self-relevant information is associated with less cognitive interference than the processing of information about other people. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 68, 93–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Visser, T. A. (2007). Masking T1 difficulty: Processing time and the attenional blink. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33(2), 285.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, G., Liu, Y., & Fang, Y. (2021). Comparison of attentional resource allocation to threat and selfrelevant information: An event-related potentials study. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 49(3), 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (31920103009), Shenzhen-Hong Kong Institute of Brain Science – Shenzhen Fundamental Research Institutions (2019SHIBS0003), Science and Technology Planning Project of Guangdong Province of China (2019A050510048), the Major Project of National Social Science Foundation (20&ZD153).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

Jing Wang: Conceived and designed the study; Collected the data of experiment2; Performed the data analysis; Wrote the paper; Revised the paper.

Corné Hoekstra: Collected the data of experiment1; Performed part of the data analysis; Wrote the paper.

Stefanie Enriquez-Geppert: Revised the paper critically for important intellectual content.

Yuejia Luo: Revised the paper; Funding support.

André Aleman: Revised the paper critically for important intellectual content.

Sander Martens: Conceived and designed the experiments; Revised the paper critically for important intellectual content.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yuejia Luo.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Consent for Publication

Consent for publication was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 229 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wang, J., Hoekstra, C., Enriquez-Geppert, S. et al. The temporal dynamics of attention: Thinking about oneself comes at a cost in sub-clinical depression but not in healthy participants. Curr Psychol 42, 19561–19572 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-02994-3

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-02994-3

Keywords

Navigation