Neural mechanisms underlying the higher levels of subjective well-being in extraverts: Pleasant bias and unpleasant resistance

Abstract

The present study investigated the neural mechanisms that underlie the higher levels of subjective well-being in extraverts. The impact of extraversion on the human sensitivity to pleasant and unpleasant pictures of diverse emotional intensities was examined. We recorded event-related potentials (ERPs) for highly positive (HP), moderately positive (MP), and neutral stimuli in the pleasant session, and for highly negative (HN), moderately negative (MN), and neutral stimuli in the unpleasant session, while subjects (16 extraverts and 16 ambiverts) performed a standard/deviant categorization task, irrespective of the emotionality of the deviant stimuli. The results showed significant emotion effects for HP and MP stimuli at the P2 and P3 components in extraverts, but not in ambiverts. Despite a pronounced emotion effect for HN stimuli across the P2, N2, and P3 components in both samples, ambiverts displayed a significant emotion effect for MN stimuli at the N2 and P3 components that was absent in extraverts. The posterior cingulate cortices, which connect multiple neural regions that are important in interactions of emotion and extraversion, may mediate the extravert-specific emotion effect for pleasant stimuli. Thus, extraverts are less susceptible to unpleasant stimuli of mild intensity than are ambiverts, while extraverts have an additional enhanced sensitivity to pleasant stimuli, regardless of emotion intensity. Consequently, the decreased threshold for pleasant emotion and the increased threshold for unpleasant emotion might be essential neural mechanisms that underlie the higher levels of subjective well-being in extraverts.

How Much We Think of Ourselves and How Little We Think of Others: An Investigation of the Neuronal Signature of Self-Consciousness between Different Personality Traits through an Event-Related Potential Study

“…However, no significant difference was obtained in ambiverts. In support of these findings, a study by Yuan et al (2012), investigating the neural mechanisms behind the subjective well-being in extraverts using pictures of different emotional intensities, found that highly positive (HP) and moderately positive (MP) pictures elicited P3 of higher amplitude in extraverts as compared to ambiverts (43). Given the fact that P3 amplitude reflects the amount of attentional resources invested in processing a given stimulus (12), and also that Johnston, Miller and Burleson (1986) proposed that the P3 amplitude is proportional to the emotional value of the eliciting stimuli, the present study, therefore, found extraverts to allocate more attention to self-related pronouns due to their emotional significance (44).…”

“…Given the fact that P3 amplitude reflects the amount of attentional resources invested in processing a given stimulus (12), and also that Johnston, Miller and Burleson (1986) proposed that the P3 amplitude is proportional to the emotional value of the eliciting stimuli, the present study, therefore, found extraverts to allocate more attention to self-related pronouns due to their emotional significance (44). According to Yuan et al (2012), this can possibly be explained by extraverts' lower threshold for pleasant emotion and higher threshold for unpleasant emotion, while ambiverts have a high threshold for pleasant emotion and a low threshold for unpleasant emotion (43). Extraverts are responsive to emotionally pleasant stimuli irrespective of its emotional valence (30).…”

“…The responsiveness of extraverts to pleasant stimuli of low intensity is believed to be the basis of the subjective well-being and personal happiness seen in this group (43)(44)(45). Extraverts are also reported to be sensitive to reward signals, both in social and unsocial situations (46)(47).…”

“…The questionnaire contains behaviouraltype questions, with 0-4 rating scales, along with the USMaP-i form for answering purpose. The sum of the scores is divided into high (34)(35)(36)(37)(38)(39)(40)(41)(42)(43)(44)(45)(46)(47)(48), average (17)(18)(19)(20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26)(27)(28)(29)(30)(31)(32) and low (0-16) scores. Those that obtained high scores were classified as extraverts, while those with average scores were classed as ambiverts.…”

El poder de los extravertidos: Evaluando la regulación de estados de ánimo positivos y negativos

“…As a result, an enormous amount of results reveals the wide range of behaviors and consequences related to this trait is available (Wilt & Revelle, 2009). Less research exists in relation to ambiverts (e.g., Grant, 2013;Yuan et al, 2012). Ambiversion was proposed by Eysenck (1971) to characterize individuals that present both extraversion and introversion features and typically present intermediate scores in extraversion scales.…”