不同心理素质水平军人对恐惧情绪的原因调节和反应调节特点

目的探讨恐惧情绪条件下,原因和反应情绪调节方式对不同心理素质水平军人的自主神经反应的影响。方法整群抽取驻渝部队官兵,用军人心理素质量表施测并随机选取高、中、低心理素质军人各50名,共150名。通过情绪材料刺激诱发恐惧情绪,利用生物反馈仪记录被试的自主神经活动指标变化。结果①高心理素质军人采用认知重视时的皮电(SC)变化值显著小于中心理素质军人(-2.16±2.18)vs(-0.67±1.05)μΩ,P<0.05];采用认知忽视时,低心理素质军人的指端血容振幅(BVP)变化值(5.47±6.33)nU]显著大于其余两组(P<0.05);但是,其心律R-R间期标准差(SDNN)变化值显著小于高心理素质军人(3.31±17.69)vs(52.23±47.30)ms,P<0.05]。②低心理素质军人采用认知忽视时的皮电恢复时间(106.50±24.95)s]以及采用认知重视时的指端血容振幅恢复时间(65.50±43.43)s]都显著长于高心理素质军人分别为(68.50±49.39)、(26.50±25.72)s,P<0.05]。③高心理素质军人中,表情宣泄组的皮电变化值上显著大于认知重视组(-0.43±0.88)vs(-2.16±2.18)μΩ,P<0.05]。低心理素质军人中,表情抑制组的高频功率(HFnorm)变化值显著小于认知重视组(-4.51±12.10)vs(5.18±3.58)nU]与简单观看组(4.09±9.48)nU,P<0.05]。④高心理素质军人采用表情抑制的皮电恢复时间(73.00±44.67)s]显著长于表情宣泄(61.50±33.09)s,P<0.05]。低心理素质军人采用表情宣泄时,皮电恢复时间(103.50±38.01)s]和指端血容振幅恢复时间(21.00±35.50)s]显著长于高心理素质军人(P<0.05)。结论原因调节不利于低心理素质军人调控恐惧情绪;认知重视更有利于高心理素质军人调节恐惧情绪。反应调节下的表情宣泄能较快恢复高心理素质军人的交感神经指标。

Characteristics of antecedent focused regulation and response focused regulation in military persons with different levels of mental quality during fear emotion processes

Objective To investigate effects of antecedent focused regulation and response focused regulation on influent autonomic nervous responses of military persons with different mental quality levels during fear emotion processes.Methods Mental Quality Questionnaire of Military Persons was employed to test 841 military persons cluster sampled from Chongqing,and based on the results 150 participants were randomly chosen,including three groups of military persons with high,moderate and low mental quality scores,respectively(n=50).Once the participants’ fear emotion was elicited by video segment,8-channel bio-feedback instrument was applied to record their four autonomic nervous activity indicators,including skin conductance(SC),high frequency(Hf Norm),standard deviation of all normal intervals(SDNN) and blood volume pulse(BVP) and recovery time.Results(1) Under cognitive-rumination condition,change value of SC (-2.16±2.18) μΩ] in the high mental quality score group was significantly lower than that in the moderate mental quality score group (-0.67±1.05) μΩ].When adopting cognitive-avoidance,change value of BVP in the low mental quality score group was significantly higher than that in the moderate and high mental quality score groups (1.26±2.54;0.94±3.10) mmHg](P<0.05),but change value of SDNN (3.31±17.69) ms] in the low mental quality score group was lower than that in high mental quality score group (52.23±47.30) ms](P<0.05).(2) SC recovery time under cognitive-avoidance condition (65.50±43.43) s] and BVP recovery time under cognitive-rumination condition (106.50±24.95) s] in the low mental quality score group were significantly longer than those in the high mental quality score group.(68.50±49.39) s and(26.50±25.72) s,respectively](P<0.05).(3) In the high mental quality score group,change value of SC in expression-revealing group (-0.43±0.88) μΩ] was higher than that in the cognitive-rumination group (-2.16±2.18) μΩ](P<0.05).And in low mental quality score group,change value of high frequency(Hf Norm) in expression-suppression group (-4.51±12.10) nU] was significantly lower than that in the cognitive-rumination group (5.18±3.58) nU] and simply-watching group (4.09±9.48) nU](P<0.05).(4) SC recovery time in the high mental quality score group when using expression-suppression (73.00±44.67) s] was longer than that when using expression-revealing (61.50±33.09) s](P<0.05).SC and BVP recovery time when using expression-revealing in the low mental quality score group (103.50±38.01) s and(21.00±35.50) s,respectively] were longer than those in the high mental quality score group(P<0.05) Conclusion Antecedent focused regulation fails to help military persons with low mental quality scores,and cognitive-rumination is much more beneficial for military persons with high mental quality scores to regulate their fear emotion.Expression revealing based on response focused regulation could help sympathetic indicators of military person with high mental quality scores recover.