Attentional Bias to Emotional Facial Expressions in Undergraduates With Suicidal Ideation: An ERP Study
Abstract
Individuals who with suicide behaviors pay more attention to negative signals than positive ones. However, it is unclear that whether this bias exists when suicide ideators perceive interpersonal stimuli (such as faces with emotion) and the underlying neural mechanism of the attention process. The present study aimed to examine the attentional bias toward emotional facial expressions by employing event-related potentials in a population with suicide ideation. Twenty-five undergraduates with suicide ideation (SI group) and sixteen undergraduates without suicide ideation (NSI group) participated in a modified dot-probe task. Compared to the NSI group, the SI group exhibited: (1) a longer mean reaction time to fearful faces; (2) a larger N1 component to fearful faces; (3) a larger N1 component to the location of sad faces, as well as to the opposite location of fearful faces and happy faces; and (4) a larger N1 component to the contralateral location of happy faces, whereas the NSI group elicited a larger N1 component to the ipsilateral location of happy faces. These results indicated that the SI group was more sensitive to negative emotions (fearful and sad faces) than positive emotions (happy faces), and the negative interpersonal stimuli in suicide ideators was processed at an early attention stage.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Those with suicide ideation were more sensitive to negatively valanced stimuli than to positively valanced stimuli, as indexed by larger N1 amplitudes to fearful and sad faces.
“those with suicide ideation were found to be more sensitive to negatively valanced stimuli than to positively valanced stimuli, as indexed by larger N1 amplitudes to fearful and sad faces (Lin et al., 2022).”
From Toward objective characterizations of suicide risk: A narrative review of laboratory-based cognitive and behavioral tasks (2023) · cites this paper as Lin et al., 2022
Cites
1 retracted
Just, M. A., Pan, L., Cherkassky, V. L., McMakin, D. L., Cha, C., Nock, M. K., & Brent, D. (2017) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-017-0234-y · Cited by 210 · see citing works
RetractedSocial exclusion impairs self-regulation
Baumeister, R. F., DeWall, C. N., Ciarocco, N. J., & Twenge, J. M. (2005) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.88.4.589 · Cited by 1,401 · see citing works
Koster, E. H. W., Crombez, G., Verschuere, B., & De Houwer, J. (2004) · Behaviour Research and Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.brat.2003.08.001 · Cited by 709 · see citing works
Measuring the Suicidal Mind: Implicit Cognition Predicts Suicidal Behavior
Nock, M. K., Park, J. M., Finn, C. T., Deliberto, T. L., Dour, H. J., & Banaji, M. R. (2010) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0956797610364762 · Cited by 624 · see citing works
A cognitive model of suicidal behavior: theory and treatment
Wenzel, A., & Beck, A. T. (2008) · Applied and Preventive Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.appsy.2008.05.001 · Cited by 491 · cited 2× · see citing works
“The cognitive model of suicide emphasized a role of cognitive processing bias in the occurrence and development of suicide (Wenzel & Beck, 2008).”
BackgroundMethodBeyond good and evil: The time-course of neural activity elicited by specific picture content.
Weinberg, A., & Hajcak, G. (2010) · Emotion · doi:10.1037/a0020242 · Cited by 425 · see citing works
Attentional bias toward suicide-related stimuli predicts suicidal behavior
Cha, C. B., Najmi, S., Park, J. M., Finn, C. T., & Nock, M. K. (2010) · Journal of Abnormal Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0019710 · Cited by 303 · cited 5× · see citing works
“It suggested that most of the participants from the SI group had a relatively lower level of suicide ideation than participants in previous studies (who reported a history of suicide attempts and self-injury behaviors) (Cha et al., 2010; Just et al., 2017; Pan et al., 2013).”
BackgroundResultInfluentialRichard-Devantoy, S., Ding, Y., Turecki, G., & Jollant, F. (2016) · Journal of Affective Disorders · doi:10.1016/j.jad.2016.02.046 · Cited by 79 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Lamontagne, S. J., Zabala, P. K., Zarate, C. A., & Ballard, E. D. (2023) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2023.105361 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
- Authors
- Lin, L., Liu, Y., Mo, J., Wang, C., Liu, T., Xu, Z., Jiang, Y., Bai, X., & Wu, X.
- Corresponding author
- Wu, Xia
- Venue
- Archives of Suicide Research
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2022-07-05
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 938-955
- ISSN
- 1381-1118 (ISSN-L)
- 1543-6136
- OpenAlex
- W4283811991
- Cited by
- 9
- References
- 8
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 1
- FWCI
- 2.06
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Archives of Suicide Research (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Natural Science Found of China
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
- Keywords
- suicidal ideation, attentional bias, emotional facial expressions, dot-probe task, N1 component, event-related potentials, fearful faces, sad faces, happy faces, undergraduate students
- MeSH terms
- Attentional Bias, Emotions, Facial Expression, Fear, Humans, Suicidal Ideation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
