The paradigm of distractor-induced blindness has previously been used to track the transition from unconscious to conscious visual processing. In a variation of this paradigm used in this study, participants (n = 13) had to detect an orientation change of tilted bars (target) embedded in a dynamic random pattern; the onset of the target was signaled by the presentation of a color cue. Occasional orientation changes preceding the cue served as distractors and severely impaired the target's detection. ERPs showed that a frontal negativity was cumulatively activated by the distractors, and early sensory components were not affected. In a control condition, the target was defined by a coherent motion of the bars. Orientation changes preceding the motion target did not affect its detection, and the frontal suppression process was not observed. However, we obtained a significant reduction of the sensory components. The data support the notion that distractors that share the target's features trigger a cumulative inhibition process preventing the conscious representation of the inhibited features. Explorative source modeling suggests that this process originates in the pFC. A top-down modulation of sensory processing could not be observed.

The conscious perception of simple visual stimuli can be modulated by the presence of distractors. In the motion blindness paradigm, the detection of coherent motion is impaired when task-irrelevant motion distractors are presented prior to the target. Aim of this study was to examine the feature specificity of the distractor effect. For this reason, targets were either defined by motion coherence ("motion blindness") or orientation changes ("orientation blindness"). In a series of three experiments we show that distractors have to share the feature characteristics of the target in order to reduce its detectability. However, independent inhibition sets for visual features can be activated if the targets' characteristics are ambiguous.

BackgroundPrevious research has identified a number of variables that constitute potential risk factors for victimization and revictimization. However, it remains unclear which factors are associated not only with childhood or adolescent victimization, but specifically with revictimization. The aim of this study was to determine whether risk recognition ability and other variables previously associated with revictimization are specifically able to differentiate individuals with childhood victimization only from revictimized individuals, and thus to predict revictimization.MethodsParticipants were N = 85 women aged 21 to 64 years who were interpersonally victimized in childhood or adolescence only, interpersonally revictimized in another period of life, or not victimized. A logistic regression analysis was conducted to examine whether risk recognition ability, sensation seeking, self-efficacy, state dissociation, shame, guilt, assertiveness, and attachment anxiety predicted group membership.ResultsThe logistic regression analysis revealed risk recognition ability, attachment anxiety, state dissociation, and self-efficacy as significant predictors of revictimization. The final model accurately classified 82.4% of revictimized, 59.1% of victimized and 93.1% of non-victimized women. The overall classification rate was 80%.ConclusionsThis study suggests that risk recognition ability, attachment anxiety, self-efficacy, and state dissociation play a key role in revictimization. Increased risk recognition ability after an interpersonal trauma may act as a protective factor against repeated victimization that revictimized individuals may lack. A lack of increased risk recognition ability in combination with higher attachment anxiety, lower self-efficacy, and higher state dissociation may increase the risk of revictimization.

Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and interpersonal traumatization are frequently associated with trauma-related guilt and shame. However, research on generalized guilt and shame in PTSD is lacking. The aim of this study was to investigate generalized explicit and implicit guilt and shame in interpersonal traumatization and PTSD. Interpersonally traumatized women either with PTSD (n = 28) or without PTSD (n = 32) and 32 nontraumatized women completed the Test of Self-Conscious Affect-3 and the Implicit Association Test to measure explicit and implicit guilt and shame. Explicit guilt and shame were significantly higher in women with PTSD than in traumatized women without PTSD. Traumatized women without PTSD showed significantly higher levels of explicit guilt and shame than nontraumatized women did. PTSD was associated with implicit guilt but not implicit shame. In addition to trauma-related guilt and shame, generalized explicit guilt and shame and implicit guilt seem to play a crucial role in PTSD.