Attention control mediates the relationship between mental imagery vividness and emotion regulation.

Contradictory findings suggest mental imagery may both exacerbate and protect against negative affect. We aimed to reconcile these contradictory findings by considering individual differences (N=989) in imagery vividness, attention control, resilience, emotion regulation strategy, and negative affect (depressive, anxious, and posttraumatic stress symptomology). We hypothesized that attention control would mediate relationships between imagery vividness and emotion regulation strategy use, and psychopathology symptomology. Results revealed that imagery vividness, as mediated by attention control, predicted greater levels of healthy reappraisal and deleterious rumination. Attention control also mediated negative relationships between imagery vividness and catastrophizing, self-blame, and psychopathology symptomology. An exploratory latent structural equation model revealed that imagery vividness and attention control aggregated positively with reappraisal and resilience scores. The present investigation suggests an adaptive function of imagery vividness via the indirect effects of attention control, facilitating adaptive emotion regulation and limiting maladaptive strategy use, thereby protecting against negative affect.

Suffering more in imagination than in reality? Mental imagery and fear generalization.

Mental imagery may represent a weaker form of perception and, thus, mental images may be more ambiguous than visual percepts. If correct, the acquisition of fear would be less specific for imagined fears in comparison to perceptual fears, perhaps facilitating broader fear generalization. To test this idea, a two-day differential fear conditioning experiment (N = 98) was conducted. On day one, two groups of participants underwent differential fear conditioning such that a specific Gabor patch orientation (CS+) was paired with mild shocks (US) while a second Gabor patch of orthogonal orientation (CS-) was never paired with shock. Critically, one group imagined the Gabor patches and the other group was visually presented the Gabor patches. Next, both groups were presented visual Gabor patches of similar orientations (GCS) to the CS+. On day two, to assess the persistence of imagined fear, participants returned to the lab and were tested on the GCS devoid of shock. For day one, in contrast to our primary hypothesis, both self-report and skin conductance response measures did not show a significant interaction between the GCS and groups. On day two, both measures demonstrated a persistence of imagined fear, without US delivery. Taken together, rather than demonstrating an overgeneralization effect, the results from this study suggest that imagery-based fear conditioning generalizes to a similar extent as perceptually acquired fear conditioning. Further, the persistence of imagery-based fear may have unique extinction qualities in comparison to perceptual-based fear.