Key result
Shock threat increased breath-holding span at functional residual capacity, whereas monetary reward and mantra meditation did not.
Why the study?
Do attentional and motivational factors (shock threat, monetary reward, mantra meditation) affect breath-holding span in humans?
Do attentional and motivational factors (shock threat, monetary reward, mantra meditation) affect breath-holding span in humans?
Negative incentives (shock threat) can extend breath-holding span at functional residual capacity, supporting the theory of behavioral inhibition.
Negative incentives may extend experimental breath-holding; leaves open clinical translation and effects of positive incentives.
Large individual differences in breathing performance have made it difficult to investigate the effects of psychological variables on respiratory parameters. This study uses an experimental approach to investigating the effects of attentional and motivational factors on breath-holding span in humans. The effects of shock threat (negative incentive), monetary reward (positive incentive), and mantra meditation (attentional control) on breath-holding span at functional residual capacity (FRC) were compared. Based on Jeffrey Gray's (1975, 1987) theory of behavioral inhibition, it was predicted that shock threat would extend FRC breath holding. Breath holding was increased under the shock threat condition but not under the monetary reward or mantra meditation conditions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alpher et al. (1991) studied this question. Shock threat (negative incentive) vs. Monetary reward (positive incentive) and mantra meditation (attentional control) was evaluated on Breath-holding span at functional residual capacity (FRC). Shock threat increased breath-holding span at functional residual capacity, whereas monetary reward and mantra meditation did not.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: