@article{WieserReichertsJuravleetal.2016, author = {Wieser, Matthias J. and Reicherts, Philipp and Juravle, Georgiana and von Leupoldt, Andreas}, title = {Attention mechanisms during predictable and unpredictable threat - a steady-state visual evoked potential approach}, series = {NeuroImage}, volume = {139}, journal = {NeuroImage}, doi = {10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.06.026}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-187365}, pages = {167-175}, year = {2016}, abstract = {Fear is elicited by imminent threat and leads to phasic fear responses with selective attention, whereas anxiety is characterized by a sustained state of heightened vigilance due to uncertain danger. In the present study, we investigated attention mechanisms in fear and anxiety by adapting the NPU-threat test to measure steady-state visual evoked potentials (ssVEPs). We investigated ssVEPs across no aversive events (N), predictable aversive events (P), and unpredictable aversive events (U), signaled by four-object arrays (30 s). In addition, central cues were presented during all conditions but predictably signaled imminent threat only during the P condition. Importantly, cues and context events were flickered at different frequencies (15 Hz vs. 20 Hz) in order to disentangle respective electrocortical responses. The onset of the context elicited larger electrocortical responses for U compared to P context. Conversely, P cues elicited larger electrocortical responses compared to N cues. Interestingly, during the presence of the P cue, visuocortical processing of the concurrent context was also enhanced. The results support the notion of enhanced initial hypervigilance to unpredictable compared to predictable threat contexts, while predictable cues show electrocortical enhancement of the cues themselves but additionally a boost of context processing.}, language = {en} } @article{WieserGerdesReichertsetal.2014, author = {Wieser, Matthias J. and Gerdes, Antje B. M. and Reicherts, Philipp and Pauli, Paul}, title = {Mutual influences of pain and emotional face processing}, series = {Frontiers in Psychology}, volume = {5}, journal = {Frontiers in Psychology}, issn = {1664-1078}, doi = {10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01160}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-118446}, pages = {1160}, year = {2014}, abstract = {The perception of unpleasant stimuli enhances whereas the perception of pleasant stimuli decreases pain perception. In contrast, the effects of pain on the processing of emotional stimuli are much less known. Especially given the recent interest in facial expressions of pain as a special category of emotional stimuli, a main topic in this research line is the mutual influence of pain and facial expression processing. Therefore, in this mini-review we selectively summarize research on the effects of emotional stimuli on pain, but more extensively turn to the opposite direction namely how pain influences concurrent processing of affective stimuli such as facial expressions. Based on the motivational priming theory one may hypothesize that the perception of pain enhances the processing of unpleasant stimuli and decreases the processing of pleasant stimuli. This review reveals that the literature is only partly consistent with this assumption: pain reduces the processing of pleasant pictures and happy facial expressions, but does not - or only partly - affect processing of unpleasant pictures. However, it was demonstrated that pain selectively enhances the processing of facial expressions if these are pain-related (i.e., facial expressions of pain). Extending a mere affective modulation theory, the latter results suggest pain-specific effects which may be explained by the perception-action model of empathy. Together, these results underscore the important mutual influence of pain and emotional face processing.}, language = {en} } @article{KopfDreslerReichertsetal.2013, author = {Kopf, Juliane and Dresler, Thomas and Reicherts, Philipp and Herrmann, Martin J. and Reif, Andreas}, title = {The Effect of Emotional Content on Brain Activation and the Late Positive Potential in a Word n-back Task}, series = {PLoS ONE}, journal = {PLoS ONE}, doi = {10.1371/journal.pone.0075598}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-96687}, year = {2013}, abstract = {Introduction There is mounting evidence for the influence of emotional content on working memory performance. This is particularly important in light of the emotion processing that needs to take place when emotional content interferes with executive functions. In this study, we used emotional words of different valence but with similar arousal levels in an n-back task. Methods We examined the effects on activation in the prefrontal cortex by means of functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) and on the late positive potential (LPP). FNIRS and LPP data were examined in 30 healthy subjects. Results Behavioral results show an influence of valence on the error rate depending on the difficulty of the task: more errors were made when the valence was negative and the task difficult. Brain activation was dependent both on the difficulty of the task and on the valence: negative valence of a word diminished the increase in activation, whereas positive valence did not influence the increase in activation, while difficulty levels increased. The LPP also differentiated between the different valences, and in addition was influenced by the task difficulty, the more difficult the task, the less differentiation could be observed. Conclusions Summarized, this study shows the influence of valence on a verbal working memory task. When a word contained a negative valence, the emotional content seemed to take precedence in contrast to words containing a positive valence. Working memory and emotion processing sites seemed to overlap and compete for resources even when words are carriers of the emotional content.}, language = {en} } @phdthesis{Reicherts2013, author = {Reicherts, Philipp}, title = {Cognitive and Emotional Influences on Placebo Analgesia and Nocebo Hyperalgesia}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-106455}, school = {Universit{\"a}t W{\"u}rzburg}, year = {2013}, abstract = {The perception of pain can be modulated by a variety of factors such as biological/pharmacological treatments as well as potent cognitive and emotional manipulations. Placebo and nocebo effects are among the most prominent examples for such manipulations. Placebo and nocebo manipulations cause reliable psychological and physiological changes, although the administered agent or treatment is inert. The present dissertation aimed at investigating the role of cognitive and emotional influences in the generation of placebo and nocebo effects on pain perception. In addition, the feasibility of solely psychological placebo manipulations to alter the perception of pain was tested. Two commonly discussed preconditions for the generation of placebo and nocebo effects are prior experiences (i.e., past encounter of drug effects) and expectations (i.e., positive or negative attitudes towards an intervention). So far, research on placebo and nocebo effects relied on the administration of sham interventions, which resembled medical treatments like inert pills, creams or injections. However, such experimental procedures deal with confounds due to earlier experiences and expectations resulting from the individual's history with medical interventions. Accordingly, the implementation of a placebo manipulation that is completely new to an individual, seems necessary to disentangle the contribution of experience and expectation for the induction of placebo and nocebo effects. To this end, in Experiment 1 the level of experience and expectation regarding a placebo-nocebo treatment was stepwise manipulated across three different experimental groups. To avoid any resemblances to earlier experiences and individual expectations, a mere psychological placebo-nocebo treatment was chosen that was new to all participants. They were instructed that visual black and white stripe patterns had been found to reliably alter the perception of pain. One group of participants received only the placebo-nocebo instruction (expectation), a second group experienced a placebo-nocebo treatment within a conditioning phase (experience) but no instruction, and a third group received the combination of both that is a placebo-nocebo instruction and a placebo-nocebo conditioning (experience + expectation). It was shown that only the experience + expectation group revealed significantly higher pain ratings and physiological responses during nocebo, compared to placebo trials of the succeeding test phase. These findings demonstrate that the induction of a mere psychological placebo-nocebo effect on pain is in principle possible. Most important, results indicate that such effects most likely rely on both, a positive treatment experience, due to the encounter of an effective intervention (placebo conditioning), and a positive expectation about the intervention (placebo instruction).Besides experience and expectation, the current mood state has been shown to modulate pain and to impact the induction of placebo and nocebo effects. In this vein it has been demonstrated that placebo effects come along with positive affect, while nocebo effects often occur together with elevated feelings of anxiety. To clarify the interaction of emotions and placebo-nocebo manipulations on pain perception, in Experiment 2 the paradigm of Experiment 1 was modified. Instead of black and white stripe patterns, positive and negative emotional pictures were presented, which either cued pain increase (nocebo) or pain decrease (placebo). Two experimental groups were compared, which differed with regard to the instructed contingency of positive pictures serving as placebo and negative pictures serving as nocebo cues or vice versa (congruent vs. incongruent). Results indicate that the differentiation of placebo and nocebo trials (behaviorally and physiologically) was more pronounced for the congruent compared to the incongruent group. However, in the incongruent group, affective pain ratings were also significantly higher for nocebo (positive pictures) than placebo (negative pictures) trials, similar to the congruent group. These findings demonstrate that a placebo-nocebo manipulation is capable to dampen and even reverse the originally pain augmenting effect of negative emotions. The results of Experiment 2 were further corroborated in Experiment 3, when the design was adapted to the fMRI scanner, and again a congruent and an incongruent experimental group were compared. Behavioral, physiological and neurophysiological markers of pain processing revealed a differentiation between nocebo and placebo conditions that was present irrespective of the experimental group. In addition, the fMRI analysis revealed an increased engagement of prefrontal areas for the incongruent group only, supposedly reflecting the reinterpretation or appraisal process when positive pictures were cueing negative outcomes. Taken together, the results of the present studies showed (a) that it is possible to induce a placebo-nocebo effect on pain solely by a psychological manipulation, (b) that both, prior experiences and positive expectation, are necessary preconditions for this placebo-nocebo effect, (c) that the impact of negative emotion on pain can be dampened and even reversed by placebo-nocebo manipulations, and (d) that most likely a cognitive top-down process is crucial for the induction of (psychological) placebo-nocebo effects. These results significantly enhance our understanding of psychological mechanisms involved in the induction of placebo-nocebo effects. Further, a fruitful foundation for future studies is provided, which will need to determine the contributions of primarily nocebo or placebo responses mediating the effects as demonstrated in the present studies. In a long-term perspective, the present findings may also help to exploit placebo effects and prevent from nocebo effect in clinical contexts by further elucidating crucial psychological factors that contribute to the placebo and nocebo response.}, subject = {Placebo}, language = {en} } @article{ReichertsGerdesPaulietal.2016, author = {Reicherts, Philipp and Gerdes, Antje B. M. and Pauli, Paul and Wieser, Matthias J.}, title = {Psychological placebo and nocebo effects on pain rely on expectation and previous experience}, series = {Journal of Pain}, volume = {17}, journal = {Journal of Pain}, number = {2}, doi = {10.1016/j.jpain.2015.10.010}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-190962}, pages = {203-214}, year = {2016}, abstract = {Expectation and previous experience are both well established key mediators of placebo and nocebo effects. However, the investigation of their respective contribution to placebo and nocebo responses is rather difficult because most placebo and nocebo manipulations are contaminated by pre-existing treatment expectancies resulting from a learning history of previous medical interventions. To circumvent any resemblance to classical treatments, a purely psychological placebonocebo manipulation was established, namely, the "visual stripe pattern induced modulation of pain." To this end, experience and expectation regarding the effects of different visual cues (stripe patterns) on pain were varied across 3 different groups, with either only placebo instruction (expectation), placebo conditioning (experience), or both (expectation + experience) applied. Only the combined manipulation (expectation + experience) revealed significant behavioral and physiological placebo nocebo effects on pain. Two subsequent experiments, which, in addition to placebo and nocebo cues, included a neutral control condition further showed that especially nocebo responses were more easily induced by this psychological placebo and nocebo manipulation. The results emphasize the great effect of psychological processes on placebo and nocebo effects. Particularly, nocebo effects should be addressed more thoroughly and carefully considered in clinical practice to prevent the accidental induction of side effects.}, language = {en} } @article{HaspertWieserPaulietal.2020, author = {Haspert, Valentina and Wieser, Matthias J. and Pauli, Paul and Reicherts, Philipp}, title = {Acceptance-Based Emotion Regulation Reduces Subjective and Physiological Pain Responses}, series = {Frontiers in Psychology}, volume = {11}, journal = {Frontiers in Psychology}, issn = {1664-1078}, doi = {10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01514}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-207220}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Acceptance-based regulation of pain, which focuses on the allowing of pain and pain related thoughts and emotions, was found to modulate pain. However, results so far are inconsistent regarding different pain modalities and indices. Moreover, studies so far often lack a suitable control condition, focus on behavioral pain measures rather than physiological correlates, and often use between-subject designs, which potentially impede the evaluation of the effectiveness of the strategies. Therefore, we investigated whether acceptance-based strategies can reduce subjective and physiological markers of acute pain in comparison to a control condition in a within-subject design. To this end, participants (N = 30) completed 24 trials comprising 10 s of heat pain stimulation. Each trial started with a cue instructing participants to welcome and experience pain (acceptance trials) or to react to the pain as it is without employing any regulation strategies (control trials). In addition to pain intensity and unpleasantness ratings, heart rate (HR) and skin conductance (SC) were recorded. Results showed significantly decreased pain intensity and unpleasantness ratings for acceptance compared to control trials. Additionally, HR was significantly lower during acceptance compared to control trials, whereas SC revealed no significant differences. These results demonstrate the effectiveness of acceptance-based strategies in reducing subjective and physiological pain responses relative to a control condition, even after short training. Therefore, the systematic investigation of acceptance in different pain modalities in healthy and chronic pain patients is warranted.}, language = {en} } @article{ReichertsPauliMoesleretal.2019, author = {Reicherts, Philipp and Pauli, Paul and M{\"o}sler, Camilla and Wieser, Matthias J.}, title = {Placebo manipulations reverse pain potentiation by unpleasant affective stimuli}, series = {Frontiers in Psychiatry}, volume = {10}, journal = {Frontiers in Psychiatry}, number = {663}, doi = {10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00663}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-201200}, year = {2019}, abstract = {According to the motivational priming hypothesis, unpleasant stimuli activate the motivational defense system, which in turn promotes congruent affective states such as negative emotions and pain. The question arises to what degree this bottom-up impact of emotions on pain is susceptible to a manipulation of top-down-driven expectations. To this end, we investigated whether verbal instructions implying pain potentiation vs. reduction (placebo or nocebo expectations)—later on confirmed by corresponding experiences (placebo or nocebo conditioning)—might alter behavioral and neurophysiological correlates of pain modulation by unpleasant pictures. We compared two groups, which underwent three experimental phases: first, participants were either instructed that watching unpleasant affective pictures would increase pain (nocebo group) or that watching unpleasant pictures would decrease pain (placebo group) relative to neutral pictures. During the following placebo/nocebo-conditioning phase, pictures were presented together with electrical pain stimuli of different intensities, reinforcing the instructions. In the subsequent test phase, all pictures were presented again combined with identical pain stimuli. Electroencephalogram was recorded in order to analyze neurophysiological responses of pain (somatosensory evoked potential) and picture processing [visually evoked late positive potential (LPP)], in addition to pain ratings. In the test phase, ratings of pain stimuli administered while watching unpleasant relative to neutral pictures were significantly higher in the nocebo group, thus confirming the motivational priming effect for pain perception. In the placebo group, this effect was reversed such that unpleasant compared with neutral pictures led to significantly lower pain ratings. Similarly, somatosensory evoked potentials were decreased during unpleasant compared with neutral pictures, in the placebo group only. LPPs of the placebo group failed to discriminate between unpleasant and neutral pictures, while the LPPs of the nocebo group showed a clear differentiation. We conclude that the placebo manipulation already affected the processing of the emotional stimuli and, in consequence, the processing of the pain stimuli. In summary, the study revealed that the modulation of pain by emotions, albeit a reliable and well-established finding, is further tuned by reinforced expectations—known to induce placebo/nocebo effects—which should be addressed in future research and considered in clinical applications.}, language = {en} }