Beyond good and evil: The time-course of neural activity elicited by specific picture content.

Abstract

The present study examined electrocortical evidence for a negativity bias, focusing on the impact of specific picture content on a range of event-related potentials (ERPs). To this end, ERPs were recorded while 67 participants viewed a variety of pictures from the International Affective Picture System. Examination of broad categories (i.e., pleasant, neutral, unpleasant) found no evidence for a negativity bias in two early components, the N1 and the Early Posterior Negativity (EPN), but revealed that unpleasant images did elicit a larger late positive potential (LPP) than pleasant pictures. However, images of erotica and mutilation elicited comparable LPP responses, as did affiliative and threatening images. Exciting (i.e., sports) images and disgusting images elicited smaller LPPs than other emotional images, similar to neutral images containing people-which were associated with the largest LPPs among neutral pictures. When these three anomalous categories (exciting, disgusting, and scenes with people) were excluded, unpleasant images no longer elicited a larger LPP than pleasant images. Thus, including exciting images in pleasant ERP averages disproportionately reduces the LPP. The present findings are discussed in light of the motivational significance of specific picture subtypes.

Anxiety disrupts the evaluative component of performance monitoring: An ERP study

“…At posterior parietal leads along the midline The interaction between context and anxiety did not reach significance either, F(1, 56) = .12, p > .10. This analysis also disclosed that the LPP was smaller in high compared to low anxious individuals, F(1, 56) = 4.71, p < .05, in agreement with these previous studies (Foti, Performance monitoring and anxiety et al, 2010;Weinberg & Hajcak, 2010). These control analyses confirmed that the reported FRN effect (and its modulation by levels of trait anxiety and emotional context) did not overlap (in time and electrode locations) with a later LPP effect taking place during feedback processing.…”

“…At any rate, future studies are needed to corroborate this statement. Importantly, control analyses showed that the reported FRN results did not overlap with a later LPP effect Schupp et al, 2004), the latter being indicated by a blunted LPP component for high compared to low anxious Performance monitoring and anxiety participants, consistent with previous ERP studies (Foti, et al, 2010;Weinberg & Hajcak, 2010). Our ERP results further show that the effect of feedback valence was only observed in the positive context, where happy faces and "neutral" faces were presented, and that this difference was larger for low, compared to high anxious participants.…”

“…Finally, we performed additional control analyses to ascertain that these FRN results were not confounded by an overlapping P300 or Late Positive Potential (LPP) effect, given that previous ERP studies showed a blunted LPP in high compared to low anxious individuals (Foti et al, 2010;Weinberg & Hajcak, 2010). At posterior parietal leads along the midline The interaction between context and anxiety did not reach significance either, F(1, 56) = .12, p > .10.…”

The late positive potential: A neural marker of the regulation of emotion-based approach-avoidance actions?

“…It is important to note that there is some overlap between P3 and LPP components, leading to a lack of clarity between studies given the different temporal definitions of LPP employed (see Weinberg & Hajcak, (2010) for a review of the different time windows). To address this Hajcak, MacNamara, & Ovlet (2010) recommend dividing the P3/LPP in multiple time windows following stimulus presentation.…”

Preference Inferences from Eye-Related Cues in Sales-Consumer Settings: ERP Timing and Localization in Relation to Inferring Performance and Oxytocin Receptor (OXTR) Gene Polymorphisms

“…Enhanced LPP amplitude was found in relation to visual stimuli that were perceived as silent due to specific task context, such as targets (Azizian, Freitas, Parvaz, & Squires, 2006). Most importantly, it has been frequently reported that LPP amplitude is larger for human faces compared scenes and objects images which implies that faces possess significance that is unique and unequalled by other categorise of visual stimuli such as generic products (Ferri, Weinberg, & Hajcak, 2012;Weinberg & Hajcak, 2010). Similar studies also conclude that images showing human faces appear to attract attention more easily than images that do not present faces (Ito & Cacioppo, 2000).…”