↓ Skip to main content

Dull to Social Acceptance Rather than Sensitivity to Social Ostracism in Interpersonal Interaction for Depression: Behavioral and Electrophysiological Evidence from Cyberball Tasks

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
98 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Dull to Social Acceptance Rather than Sensitivity to Social Ostracism in Interpersonal Interaction for Depression: Behavioral and Electrophysiological Evidence from Cyberball Tasks
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, March 2017
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2017.00162
Pubmed ID
Authors

Qing Zhang, Xiaosi Li, Kai Wang, Xiaoqin Zhou, Yi Dong, Lei Zhang, Wen Xie, Jingjing Mu, Hongchen Li, Chunyan Zhu, Fengqiong Yu

Abstract

Objectives: Impairments in interpersonal relationships in depression present as irritability, pessimism, and withdrawal, and play an important role in the onset and maintenance of the disorder. However, we know little about the neurological causes of this impaired interpersonal function. This study used the event-related brain potential (ERP) version of the Cyberball paradigm to investigate the emotions and neural activities in depressive patients during social inclusion and exclusion simultaneously to explore neuropsychological mechanisms. Methods: Electrophysiological data were recorded when 27 depressed patients and 23 healthy controls (HCs) performed a virtual ball tossing game (Cyberball) during which the participants believed they were playing with two other co-players over the internet. The Cyberball paradigm included two other conditions; inclusion during which participants received the ball with the same probability as the other players to experience a feeling of acceptance, and exclusion during which the participants experienced a feeling of ostracism when the other two players threw the ball with each other. The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) was used as a baseline and after each block during the Cyberball to assess positive and negative effects. In addition, a brief Need-Threat Scale (NTS) was used to assess the fulfillment of basic needs of subjects after each block and 10 min after ostracism. Moreover, the relationship between the ERP data of depression and clinical symptoms was analyzed. Results: Exclusion compared to inclusion Cyberball caused a decrease in positive affect and an increase in negative affect. The group differences were only found in the positive affect. Moreover, patients reported a lower level of basic needs than did HCs after social inclusion, but a similar level of basic needs after social exclusion. At the electrophysiological level, patients showed decreased P3 amplitudes compared to HCs in social inclusion, and P3 amplitudes were borderline negatively correlated with their scores of anhedonia symptoms. Limitations: A limitation of our study was that the subjects' criteria were different. Conclusions: The behavioral and electrophysiological results indicated that the interpersonal problems in depressive patients were mainly due to deficits in processing the pleasurable social stimuli rather than aversive social cues.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 98 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 98 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 19%
Student > Bachelor 17 17%
Student > Master 14 14%
Researcher 7 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Other 11 11%
Unknown 24 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 44 45%
Social Sciences 5 5%
Neuroscience 5 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 5%
Other 6 6%
Unknown 28 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 April 2017.
All research outputs
#15,450,375
of 22,959,818 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#5,280
of 7,179 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#194,325
of 309,406 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#154
of 186 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,959,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,179 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 309,406 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 186 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.