THE INFLUENCE OF MOTIVATION ON EMOTION REGULATION AND MOTOR PERFORMANCE: EXAMINATION OF A NEURO-AFFECTIVE MODEL

Mental stress is known to disrupt the execution of motor performance and can lead to decrements in the quality of performance, however, individuals have shown significant differences regarding how fast and well they can perform a skilled task according to how well they can manage stress and emotion. The purpose of this study was to advance our understanding of how the brain modulates emotional reactivity under different motivational states to achieve differential performance in a target shooting task that requires precision visuomotor coordination. In order to study the interactions in emotion regulatory brain areas (i.e. the ventral striatum, amygdala, prefrontal cortex) and the autonomic nervous system, reward and punishment interventions were employed and the resulting behavioral and physiological responses contrasted to observe the changes in shooting performance (i.e. shooting accuracy and stability of aim) and neuro-cognitive processes (i.e. cognitive load and reserve) during the shooting task. Thirty-five participants, aged 18 to 38 years, from the Reserve Officers’ Training Corp (ROTC) at the University of Maryland were recruited to take 30 shots at a bullseye target in three different experimental conditions. In the reward condition, $1 was added to their total balance for every 10-point shot. In the punishment condition, $1 was deducted from their total balance if they did not hit the 10-point area. In the neutral condition, no money was added or deducted from their total balance. When in the reward condition, which was reportedly most enjoyable and least stressful of the conditions, heart rate variability was found to be positively related to shooting scores, inversely related to variability in shooting performance and positively related to alpha power (i.e. less activation) in the left temporal region. In the punishment (and most stressful) condition, an increase in sympathetic response (i.e. increased LF/HF ratio) was positively related to jerking movements as well as variability of placement (on the target) in the shots taken. This, coupled with error monitoring activity in the anterior cingulate cortex, suggests evaluation of self-efficacy might be driving arousal regulation, thus affecting shooting performance. Better performers showed variable, increasing high-alpha power in the temporal region during the aiming period towards taking the shot which could indicate an adaptive strategy of engagement. They also showed lower coherence during hit shots than missed shots which was coupled with reduced jerking movements and better precision and accuracy. Frontal asymmetry measures revealed possible influence of the prefrontal lobe in driving this effect in reward and neutral conditions. The possible interactions, reasons behind these findings and implications are discussed.

A Feminist Affective Turn for Public Relations: Mothers, Passionate Publics, and the Childhood Vaccine Debate

This project proposes a feminist intervention in how affect and publics are theorized in public relations research. Drawing from extant literature, I argue that public relations theories of affect and publics have been apolitical and lack depth and context (Leitch & Motion, 2010a). Using the context of the online childhood vaccine debate, I illustrate several theories and concepts of the new feminist affective turn, as well as postmodern theories of affect, relevant to public relations research: (a) Public Feelings, “ugly” feelings, agency, and community (Cvetkovich, 2012; Ngai, 2007); (b) passionate politics (Mouffe, 2014); (c) postmodern assemblages, biopower, and body politics (Deleuze & Guattari, 1988; Foucault, 1984); (d) affective facts and logics of future threats (Massumi, 2010); and (e) affective ethics (Bertleson & Murphie, 2010). Scholarship in the areas of public relations, risk, feminist and postmodern affect theory, and the vaccine debate provided theoretical grounding for this project. My research questions asked: How is feminist affect theory embodied by mothers in the vaccine debate? How do mothers understand risks as affective facts in the vaccine debate (if at all)? What affective logics are used by mothers in the vaccine debate (if any)? And, What are sources of knowledge for mothers in the vaccine debate? Multi-sited online ethnographic methods were used to explore how feminist affect theory contributes to public relations research, including 29 one-on-one in-depth interviews with mothers of young children and participant observation of 15 online discussions about vaccines on parenting websites BabyCenter.com, TheBump.com, and WhatToExpect.com. I used snowball sampling to recruit interview participants and grounded theory (Glaser & Strauss, 1967) to analyze interview and online data. Results show that feminist affect theory contributes to theoretical and practical knowledge in public relations by politicizing and contextualizing understandings of publics and elucidating how affective facts and logics inform publics’ knowledge and choices, specifically in the context of risk. I also found evidence of suppression of dissent (Martin, 2015) and academic bias in vaccine debate research, which resulted in cultures of silence. Further areas of study included how specific contexts such as motherhood and issues of privilege and access affect publics’ experiences, knowledges, and choices.