Loneliness, Attentional Processing of Social Cues, and Effortful Control
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Loneliness, Attentional Processing of Social Cues, and Effortful Control THESIS Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Heather Derry, B.A. Graduate Program in Psychology The Ohio State University 2012 Master’s Thesis Committee: Professor Janice K. Kiecolt-Glaser, Ph.D., Advisor Professor Charles Emery, Ph.D., Co-Advisor Professor Michael Vasey, Ph.D. 1 Copyright by Heather Michelle Derry 2012 2 Abstract Loneliness negatively impacts health, well-being, and performance in social situations. Prior work has suggested that lonely individuals process positive and negative social stimuli differently than those who are not lonely, and that self-regulation may play a role in this processing. However, this literature has relied mainly upon observations of social interactions and self-report methods. The current study used standardized stimuli in a reaction time paradigm to study the relationship between loneliness and attentional processing of social. A pictorial dot probe program was used to examine undergraduate participants’ attention toward angry, disgust, and happy faces at three different stimulus intervals (250 ms, 500 ms, 1250 ms). Loneliness was measured using the UCLA Loneliness Scale, and effortful control composite scores utilized the Effortful Control – Persistence/Low Distractibility scale and the Adult Temperament Questionnaire (EC subscale). Loneliness was not related to attentional bias scores for angry, disgust, or happy trials. Effortful control did not moderate the association in the expected fashion. Post-hoc analyses tested other well-established trends (e.g., negative affectivity) in order to determine the dot probe program’s utility. These data replicated only some of these previous findings, suggesting that the current results should be interpreted cautiously. Accordingly, lonely individuals did not exhibit attentional biases in this study, and future research may help to pinpoint which stage of social processing is affected by loneliness. ii Dedication To my parents, my brother, and Jon: Your love & encouragement keep me going. iii Acknowledgments I am thankful to my advisor, Dr. Janice Kiecolt-Glaser, for her guidance, expertise, and understanding throughout the completion of this project. It has been a helpful challenge, and I look forward to continued learning in psychoneuroimmunology under her guidance. Thank you to committee members Dr. Charles Emery and Dr. Mike Vasey for their time, patience, and advice. I greatly appreciate your help in bridging this research area, yet still keeping links to health psychology. Many thanks are due to past and present post-docs in Dr. Kiecolt-Glaser’s lab: Dr. Jeannette Bennett, Dr. Chris Fagundes, and Dr. Lisa Jaremka – thank you for your detailed feedback and open office doors. Jack Andrews, an undergraduate student with a bright future: thanks for bringing enthusiasm to data management. Last but not least, thank you to my labmate, Monica Lindgren, both for reading my drafts and keeping me positive. iv Vita 1988 ……………………………………………………………….Born, Pittsburgh, PA 2006 …….……………………………………………...Norwin High School, Irwin, PA 2010 ……………………...………...…B.A., Ohio Wesleyan University, Delaware, OH Publications Fagundes CP, Bennett JM, Derry H, Kiecolt-Glaser JK. Relationships and inflammation across the lifespan: Social developmental pathways to disease. Social and Personality Psychology Compass. 2011; 5(11): 891–903. Fagundes CP, Gillie BL, Derry HM, Bennett JM, Kiecolt-Glaser JK, (2012), Resilience and immune function in older adults. In GC Smith and B Hayslip (Ed.), Annual review of gerontology and geriatrics: Emerging perspectives on resilience in adulthood and later life (pp. 29-47). New York: Springer. Honors and Awards 2012 Department of Psychology Outstanding Leadership Award in Teaching Psychology 100, The Ohio State University 2010 University Fellowship, The Ohio State University 2010 Department of Psychology Scholastic Achievement Award, Ohio Wesleyan University 2009 Department of Psychology Harry Bahrick Professional Development Award, Ohio Wesleyan University Fields of Study Major Field: Psychology v Table of Contents Abstract ............................................................................................................................ ii Dedication ....................................................................................................................... iii Acknowledgments ........................................................................................................... iv Vita ................................................................................................................................... v List of Tables .................................................................................................................. vii List of Figures ............................................................................................................... viii Chapter 1: Background and Significance ........................................................................ 1 Chapter 2: Research Design and Methods..................................................................... 17 Chapter 3: Results ......................................................................................................... 33 Chapter 4: Discussion .................................................................................................... 39 Appendix A: Tables ....................................................................................................... 56 Appendix B: Figures ..................................................................................................... 64 Appendix C: Dot probe stimuli ..................................................................................... 68 Appendix D: Self-report measures ................................................................................ 70 vi List of Tables Table 1. Overall mean response latencies to probes and bias scores. ........................... 57 Table 2. Demographic information for total sample (n=203). ...................................... 58 Table 3. Descriptive statistics for psychosocial variables. ............................................ 59 Table 4. Correlations (r) between study variables. ........................................................ 60 Table 5. Repeated measures ANOVA statistics for primary analysis of Hypothesis 1. 61 Table 6. Correlations (r) between psychological variables and attentional bias scores for angry, disgust, and happy dot probe trials. ............................................................... 62 Table 7. Correlations (r) between loneliness and effortful control with health-related variables. ......................................................................................................................... 63 vii List of Figures Figure 1. Graph of attentional bias scores by loneliness and EC for 1250 ms disgust trials.. .............................................................................................................................. 65 Figure 2. Graph of attentional bias scores by NA and EC for 1250 ms angry trials. .... 66 Figure 3. Graph of attentional bias scores by neuroticism and EC for 1250 ms angry trials ................................................................................................................................ 67 Figure 4. Example of (A) angry, (B) disgust, (C) happy, and (D) neutral faces from the NimStim set. ................................................................................................................... 69 viii Chapter 1: Background and Significance Humans have a strong need to belong that innately motivates our behavior, shapes our thoughts, and affects our emotions (Baumeister & Leary, 1995). Loneliness represents one state in which these belongingness needs are unmet. When social relationships are fewer or less satisfying than desired, a person may experience loneliness (Peplau & Perlman, 1979). Accordingly, loneliness results from a discrepancy between an individual’s desired and perceived relationships (Cacioppo, Hawkley, Crawford, et al., 2002). In addition to causing emotional distress, perceived isolation can disrupt physical well-being (Kiecolt-Glaser et al., 1984). Factors that lead to the development and maintenance of loneliness may be important for understanding health-related outcomes. Perceived isolation motivates attempts to reestablish social connections, much like hunger drives the search for food (Baumeister & Leary, 1995). The ability to monitor the environment for social cues is an integral component in regulating social endeavors (Pickett & Gardner, 2005). According to this social monitoring view, individuals choose to initiate social interactions after assessing current levels of belongingness needs, then monitoring verbal and nonverbal social cues. In this way, early-stage social processing (i.e., attention) influences later behavior, including the outcome of social situations. An individual detects social cues that signal rejection as 1 well as those that signal connectedness, then acts appropriately. Social interactions are influenced by early-stage processes such as attention and perception of social cues, as well as later stage processes like memory, overt judgments, and prosocial behavior (DeWall, Maner, & Rouby, 2009). While perceived isolation should drive the need for social interactions, lonely individuals