부산대학교 도서관

Although researchers have documented behavioral and brain structure correlates of pain resilience, associated physiological responses have received little consideration. In this study, we assessed psychophysiological differences between high (HPR), moderate (MPR), and low (LPR) pain resilience subgroups during anticipation, experiencing, and recovery from laboratory pain. In an initial pain anticipation task, participants (79 women, 32 man) viewed visual cues to signal possible mild or intense shocks prior to receiving these shocks. Subsequently, in a pain recovery task, participants received uncued mild and intense shocks. Subjective appraisals were assessed during each task in tandem with continuous recording of skin conductance level (SCL), heart rate variability (HRV), and corrugator electromyography (cEMG). On physiological indexes, HPR subgroup members displayed significantly lower SCL than MPR and LPR subgroups did during anticipation and experiencing of pain while no resilience group effects were found for HRV or cEMG. During pain recovery, HPR and LPR subgroups displayed weaker SCL than the MPR subgroup did in the immediate aftermath of shock. However, HPR members continued to display lower SCL than other groups did over an extended recovery period. On self‐report measures, the LPR subgroup reported higher levels of anticipatory anxiety and expected pain than HPR and MPR subgroups did during the pain anticipation task. Together, results suggested higher pain resilience is characterized, in part, by comparatively reduced SCL during the course of anticipating, experiencing and recovering from painful shock. This study is the first to evaluate psychophysiological correlates of pain resilience during anticipation, experience, and recovery from painful electrical stimulation. Lower pain resilience was characterized by higher anxiety and expected pain ratings during pain anticipation as well as comparatively elevated skin conductance (SCL) during pain anticipation, while experiencing painful stimulation, and over the extended recovery period following painful stimuli. Conversely, curvilinear resilience‐SCL relations were observed during the immediate aftermath of painful stimulation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]