Research paperSelf-construal differences in neural responses to negative social cues
Introduction
Emerging cultural models are challenging the traditional notion that emotion is governed by universal neural and psychological processes: rather, these models suggest that cultural factors play a significant role in the emotional lives of individuals (Engelmann and Pogosyan, 2013, Ford and Mauss, 2015, Mesquita, 2001; Rogers, Schröder, & von Sheve, 2014). Recent neuroimaging evidence demonstrates that cultural factors modulate the neural substrates of perception, attention, memory and social processing (Han and Ma, 2014, Han et al., 2013). Less is known about how culture might influence the engagement of the neural systems underpinning negative emotion or threat-related perception. It is well established that negatively valenced or threat-related cues are processed with priority in order to aid survival, modulating attentional and perceptual neural resources LeDoux, 2012, Liddell et al., 2005, Vuilleumier, 2005; Williams, Palmer, Liddell, Song, & Gordon, 2006), yet it is unknown the extent to which cultural factors guide these processes (Han et al., 2013). Indeed, the current evidence-base of the emotional brain in humans draws upon research conducted mostly in Western-based cultural contexts (e.g. North America, Western Europe, Australia), relying on participant cohorts that adhere to an individualistic world-view. Few studies have examined how emotional processing systems are engaged amongst groups with collectivistic value systems. Given the centrality of threat processing models to the understanding of the neural substrates of anxiety and fear circuitry disorders (LeDoux, 2014), and the high prevalence of these disorders cross-culturally (Hofmann and Hinton, 2014), it is essential to investigate whether cultural constructs shape the negative social processing in the brain.
Cultures fundamentally differ in regards to representation of the self in relation to others − varying along an individualism-collectivism dimension of self-construal (Cross, Hardin, & Gercek-Swing, 2011; Markus and Kitayama, 2010; Oyserman, Coon, & Kemmelmeier, 2002). Individualistic self-construal is associated with an independent self valuing autonomy and achievement, reliance on an analytical cognitive style, (Markus and Kitayama, 1991), and is dominant in Western-based cultural groups; whereas collectivistic self-construal emphasizes an interdependent self, holistic thinking, social harmony and relatedness, and is prevalent in East Asian and other social-based cultural groups (Cross et al., 2011, Markus and Kitayama, 2010). Cultural models suggest that self-construal as represented at the population level is a key determinant of how culture as a whole shapes brain function to influence cognition, behavior, and emotion (Chiao and Immordino-Yang, 2013, Han and Humphreys, 2016, Han and Northoff, 2008, Han et al., 2013, Kitayama and Uskul, 2011). However, self-construal can also vary substantially at the individual level within cultural groups (Oyserman et al., 2002). Indeed, individual differences in self-construal have been found to moderate the influence of cultural group on brain activity during attention, cognitive and self-referential tasks (for a summary see Han and Humphreys, 2016). However, these studies appear to neglect the possibility that individual differences in self-construal may be the central factor driving brain function, beyond the traditional boundaries of cultural background. In this study, we consider the specific influence of individualistic vs collectivistic self-construal measured at the individual level on brain activity during a specially-designed negative social cue processing task. Since few studies have directly examined the influence of self-construal outside of cultural group on brain function (Han and Humphreys, 2016), we have relied on the cultural neuroscience literature to inform our hypotheses.
Cultural groups show different psychological and neural correlates of visual perception and attention (Goh and Park, 2009, Han and Northoff, 2008, Han et al., 2013), with some studies also reporting the mediating role of individual differences in self-construal (e.g. Chiao et al., 2009; Hedden, Ketay, Aron, Markus, & Gabrieli, 2008; Ma et al., 2014). Studies have shown that individualistic cultural groups are relatively biased towards attending focal objects or local features of stimuli in visual scenes (Chua, Boland, & Nisbett, 2005; Nisbett and Masuda, 2003). These patterns are consistent with an independent self-construal and analytical thinking prevalent in individualistic cultures. Conversely, those from collectivistic cultural groups preferentially attend to contextual and global features of stimuli, and the inter-relationship between focal objects and background, reflecting an interdependent self-orientation and holistic cognitive style (Chua et al., 2005, Nisbett and Masuda, 2003). These perceptual biases shape brain activity. For example, Gutchess et al. (2006) found that a U.S. Caucasian group (compared to an East Asian group) preferentially engaged object-processing regions (ventral occipitotemporal cortex) when attending to complex visual scenes consisting of a neutral central object (e.g. elephant) in a neutral background scene (e.g. jungle). Another study showed that U.S. participants engaged stronger fusiform face area (FFA) activity compared to East Asian participants to face (object cues), who instead showed greater selectivity in the lingual landmark region during house (i.e. place) processing – a region associated with stimulus binding (Goh et al., 2010). Studies have also reported increased sensitivity to visual stimulus incongruency amongst collectivistic cultural groups, reflected in enhanced lateral occipitotemporal activity (Jenkins, Yang, Goh, Hong, & Park, 2010) and N400 event-related potential amplitude (Goto, Ando, Huang, Yee, & Lewis, 2010), as well as compensatory neural activations when engaging in culturally non-preferred attentional allocation tasks (Hedden et al., 2008). The only study to directly examine self-construal differences found similar compensatory attentional network activations when individualists vs collectivists grouped based on individual differences completed a global vs local attentional shift processing task respectively (Liddell et al., 2015).
There has been little study of how these cultural or self-construal perceptual biases to object vs contextual cues might extend into the emotional realm. The one exception is an eye tracking study, which showed that a collectivistic cultural group (i.e. Japanese) relied more on contextual social cues to appraise the emotional value of centralized target faces compared to a U.S. Caucasian group (Masuda et al., 2008). More broadly, studies are suggesting that culture plays an important role in modulating the neural and psychological systems that underlie emotion processing. Cultural group differences have been observed in the engagement of the amygdala in response to: in-group threat (Chiao et al., 2008, Moriguchi et al., 2005); direct vs averted eye gaze cues (Adams et al., 2010); and the degree of acculturation in bicultural Asian groups (Derntl et al., 2009, Derntl et al., 2012). Other studies have focused on cultural differences in the social domain, and have included a consideration of self-construal as a moderating factor. Activation within brain regions critical to emotion regulation, including the medial prefrontal cortex, appear to be stronger during self-related vs other-related processing or priming in individualistic vs collectivistic cultural groups respectively, with activity modulated by individual differences in self-construal (Chiao et al., 2009, Chiao et al., 2010; Harada, Li, & Chiao, 2010). A meta-analysis showed that during social affective processing, East Asian cultural groups activate brain nodes associated with making social inferences (e.g. temporoparietal junction – TPJ), with activity correlating with level of collectivistic self-construal (Ma et al., 2014) – consistent with a heightened sensitivity to others (Markus and Kitayama, 2010). By contrast, Caucasian groups appear more likely to engage regions involved in self-reflection (e.g. dorsomedial prefrontal cortex (DMPFC) including the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC)) and processing internal changes in body states (e.g. insula) – congruent with a heightened self-focus (Han and Ma, 2014, Ma et al., 2014). These meta-analysis findings however, are contradicted by parallel evidence that suggests collectivistic groups preferentially engage neural systems of empathy when viewing others in distress, including the anterior insula and dorsal anterior cingulate cortex (dACC), with activations being correlated with the degree of self-reported focus on others (Immordino-Yang, Yang, & Damasio, 2014). Such cultural differences in interpersonal reactivity appear to be driven by self-construal (), which may impact on how neural systems are engaged to object vs contextual components of negatively-valenced social cues.
In parallel, there is a growing recognition of the important role of context in influencing the neural correlates of emotion processing irrespective of culture (Barrett, Mesquita, & Gendron, 2011). Emotional (vs neutral) contexts have been found to modulate responses in the amygdala, ACC and temporal regions to object changes (Mobbs et al., 2006). Signals from non-facial head and body cues, non-verbal movements (de Gelder et al., 2006), and spatial contextual cues (Barrett and Kensinger, 2010; Righart and de Gelder, 2008) also influence brain activations to focal face and object stimuli (Barrett et al., 2011). The brain has specialized regions dedicated to face vs context processing. Faces are known to trigger domain-specific activations in the face fusiform area (FFA) situated within the fusiform gyrus (Kanwisher, McDermott, & Chun, 1997), with level of activity modulated by negative affect (Vuilleumier and Pourtois, 2007) and the degree of congruency between the face and its context (Van den Stock, Vandenbulcke, Sinke, Goebel, & DeGelder, 2014). Neural regions involved in scene or place processing include the parahippocampal gyrus (PHG) (Bar, 2004; Epstein and Ward, 2010), with a sub-region known as the place processing area (PPA) specializing in the enhancing contextual associations between stimuli (Bar et al., 2008b), with functioning being modulated by the emotional significance of the perceptual event (Alvarez, Biggs, Chen, Pine, & Grillon, 2008; Van den Stock, Vandenbulcke, Sinke, Goebel, et al., 2014).
In the current study, we adopted an individual difference approach to investigate whether individualistic and collectivistic groups engaged distinct neural systems while evaluating negative social cues. Groups were defined by self-reported levels of self-construal regardless of cultural background following similar methods from previous studies (Chiao et al., 2009, Liddell et al., 2015). We developed a new paradigm to specifically activate negative focal object (faces) vs contextual processing (background) brain activity. Participants evaluated negative and neutral (with scrambled baseline) social images comprising of a negatively-valenced focal person within a negative context, with stimuli manipulated to isolate context dependent activity, whilst undergoing functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) scanning. To analyze the data, we first took a whole brain exploratory approach to examine neural activation patterns between self-construal groups in response to face vs context conditions. Second, we drew upon the existing literature to make explicit hypotheses regarding individual differences in self-construal, tested via region of interest (ROI) analyses.
We predicted that the individualistic group would show enhanced sensitivity to facial components of the scenes, reflected in heightened activations in the fusiform gyrus when processing negative scenes and faces, consistent with a bias towards salient object (in this case face) processing. We hypothesized that the collectivistic self-construal group, with its biases towards context, would show stronger neural activity in context-sensitive regions particularly during negative information processing. We predicted that the collectivistic group would therefore engage in stronger context dependent activations involving the PHG as well as heightened insula and dACC reflecting a focus on others in distress. We also examined the amygdala as a core ROI involved in threat responsivity.
Section snippets
Participants
Forty-two participants were initially recruited to take part in the study (20 females; 22 males; mean age 22.1 years (SD = 4.42). Participants were screened for current diagnosis of psychological disorder or neurological disease; significant history of alcohol or substance abuse; eligibility to undertake an MRI; and English language proficiency. Informed consent was provided by participants in line with approval from North Sydney Local Area Health Service and University of New South Wales Human
Demographics
A total of 35 participants were eligible for analysis after removing 6 participants due to movement artefact and 1 participant due to a self-construal index of zero. The final numbers were n = 19 in the IND group; n = 16 in the COL group. The groups did not differ in age (t(33) = 1.38, p=0.18), sex (χ2(1) = 1.08, p=0.58), depression (t(33) = −0.60, p=0.55) or anxiety levels (t(33) = −0.81, p=0.42). As expected, groups significantly differed in terms of the SC-index, (t(33) = 8.09, p < 0.000). IND and COL
Discussion
This study examined whether individual differences in individualistic or collectivistic self-construal modulated brain regions associated with negative social processing. The findings suggest that self-construal groups significantly differed in the neural systems responsive to social cues. The group with high collectivistic self-construal engaged neural responses consistent with enhanced context processing when appraising negative social cues. This was evidenced by specialized right
Acknowledgements
This study was supported by funding from the Australian Research Council (LP120200284). The authors wish to thank Ian Watkins for his assistance with data collection.
References (75)
- et al.
Mechanisms of attentional biases towards threat in anxiety disorders: an integrative review
Clinical Psychology Review
(2010) - et al.
The parahippocampal place area: Recognition, navigation, or encoding?
Neuron
(1999) - et al.
Culture and emotion regulation
Current Opinion in Psychology
(2015) - et al.
Culture sculpts the perceptual brain
Progress in Brain Research
(2009) - et al.
Self-construal: A cultural framework for brain function
Current Opinion in Psychology
(2016) - et al.
Cultural differences in human brain activity: A quantitative meta-analysis
Neuroimage
(2014) Rethinking the emotional brain
Neuron
(2012)- et al.
A direct brainstem-amygdala-cortical ‘alarm' system for subliminal signals of fear
Neuroimage
(2005) - et al.
Self-referential processing in our brain-A meta-analysis of imaging studies on the self
Neuroimage
(2006) - et al.
Dynamics of emotiona effects on spatial attention in the human visual cortex
Progress in Brain Research
(2006)
Automated anatomical labeling of activations in SPM using a macroscopic anatomical parcellation of the MNI MRI single-subject brain
Neuroimage
Distributed and interactive brain mechansims during emotion face perception: Evidence from functional neuroimaging
Neuropsychologia
How brains beware: Neural mechanisms of emotional attention
Trends in Cognitive Sciences
The ‘when' and ‘where' of perceiving signals of threat versus non-threat
Neuroimage
Culture, gaze and the neural processing of fear expressions
Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience
Contextual fear conditioning in humans: cortical-Hippocampal and amygdala contributions
The Journal of Neuroscience
Visual objects in context
Nature Reviews Neuroscience
Famous faces activate contextual associations in the parahippocampal cortex
Cerebral Cortex
Scenes unseen: the parahippocampal cortex intrinsically subserves contextual associations, not scenes or places per Se
The Journal of Neuroscience
Context is routinely encoded during emotion perception
Psychological Science
Context in emotion perception
Current Directions in Psychological Science
An inventory for measuring depression
Archives of General Psychiatry
Modularity and the cultural mind: contributions of cultural neuroscience to cognitive theory
Perspectives on Psychological Science
Cultural specificity in amygdala response to fear faces
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
Neural basis of individualistic and collectivist views of self
Human Brain Mapping
Dynamic cultural influences on neural representations of the self
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
Cultural variation in eye movements during scene perception
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
How do you feel now? The anterior insula and human awareness
Nature Neuroscience
The what, how, why and where of self-construal
Personality and Social Psychology Review
Beyond the face: Exploring rapid influences of context on face processing
Progress in Brain Research
Amygdala activation during recognition of emotions in a foreign ethnic group is associated with duration of stay
Social Neuroscience
Culture but not gender modulates amygdala activation during explicity emotion recognition
BMC Neuroscience
A cortical network sensitive to stimulus salience in a neutral behavioral context across multiple sensory modalities
Journal of Neurophysiology
The neural bases of social pain: evidence for shared representations with physical pain
Psychosomatic Medicine
Emotion perception across cultures: the role of cognitive mechanisms
Frontiers in Psychology
A cortical representation of the local visual environment
Nature
How reliable are visual context effects in the parahippocampal place area?
Cerebral Cortex
Cited by (8)
Does ostracism impede Chinese tourist self-disclosure on WeChat? The perspective of social anxiety and self-construal
2022, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism ManagementCitation Excerpt :Russell, Gould, and Fergus (2017) suggested that individuals’ self-construal can influence their evaluation concerns, leading to social anxiety for some but not for others. Individuals with different self-construal levels have significantly different responses to negative social cues in their neural systems (Liddell, Felmingham, Das et al., 2017), and higher ISC is often related to increased levels of social anxiety (Cross et al., 2011). The confirmation of the moderating role of ISC suggests that the self-disclosure behaviour of tourists on social platforms is the outcome of not only external social factors but also intrinsic characteristics of tourists.
Mental Health and Treatment Considerations for Refugees
2022, Comprehensive Clinical Psychology, Second EditionHow consumer ethnocentrism modulates neural processing of domestic and foreign products: A neuroimaging study
2020, Journal of Retailing and Consumer ServicesCitation Excerpt :Specifically, the authors created a mask containing spheres measuring 10 mm in radius based on a priori anatomical coordinates gleaned from previous studies analyzing the processing of reward, self-referential and distrust/disgust. Particularly, the authors followed the lines of the study by Batra et al. (2013) for reward, Ebner et al. (2013) for self-reference and Liddell et al. (2017) for disgust and aversion. Exploratory whole-brain analyses were also implemented.
Investigating Neural Substrates of Individual Independence and Interdependence Orientations via Efficiency-Based Dynamic Functional Connectivity: A Machine Learning Approach
2022, IEEE Transactions on Cognitive and Developmental Systems