Disgust- and not fear-evoking images hold our attention

Abstract

Even though disgust and fear are both negative emotions, they are characterized by different physiology and action tendencies. The aim of this study was to examine whether fear- and disgust-evoking images would produce different attention bias effects, specifically those related to attention (dis)engagement. Participants were asked to identify a target which was briefly presented around a central image cue, which could either be disgusting, frightening, or neutral. The interval between cue onset and target presentation varied within blocks (200, 500, 800, 1100 ms), allowing us to investigate the time course of attention engagement. Accuracy was lower and reaction times were longer when targets quickly (200 ms) followed disgust-evoking images than when they followed neutral- or fear-evoking images. For the other, longer interval conditions no significant image effects were found. These results suggest that emotion-specific attention effects can be found at very early visual processing stages and that only disgust-evoking images, and not fear-evoking ones, keep hold of our attention for longer. We speculate that this increase in early attention allocation is related to the need to perform a more comprehensive risk-assessment of the disgust-evoking images. The outcomes underline not only the importance of examining the time course of emotion induced attention effects but also the need to look beyond the dimensions of valence and arousal.

Disgust-specific modulation of early attention processes

“…Recent reports however suggest that stimuli evoking disgust produce different attention effects than those eliciting fear, even when these stimuli are equally arousing and similarly negative (Carretié, Ruiz-Padial, López-Martín, & Albert, 2011;Chapman, Johannes, Poppenk, Moscovitch, & Anderson, 2013;Van Hooff et al, 2013). More specifically, results from these studies suggest that attention bias effects are exclusively present or are much larger for disgustas compared to fear-evoking pictures.…”

“…For example, in our previous study we found that task irrelevant disgust-evoking pictures delayed subsequent, peripheral target identification exclusively when these targets were presented 200 ms after picture onset and not after 500, 800, or 1100 ms (Van Hooff et al, 2013). Likewise, Ciesielski, Armstrong, Zald, and Olatunji (2010) reported that the enhanced attentional blink effect for emotional stimuli rapidly declined from short (200 ms) to longer time lags (400 ms and 600 ms) and even reversed for the longest time lag of 800 ms (i.e., enhanced instead of diminished target processing following negative images).…”

“…Indeed, a differential attention effect for fear-and disgustevoking images would make sense given that the sight of, for example, an aggressive animal or a pointed gun requires urgent action at the cost of being killed, while, on the contrary, noticing a bleeding injury or a rotten piece of meat calls for a more detailed evaluation with less immediate costs attached to it. In other words, only in the latter, more disgust-related cases one can permit oneself to narrow attention (Gable & Harmon-Jones, 2010) and/or to direct (temporarily) more attention resources towards the "threatening" stimulus (Carretié et al, 2011;Van Hooff et al, 2013). Regardless of interpretation, the single fact that different attention effects are observed for disgust-and fear-related stimuli signifies that it is important to design studies that allow for the investigation of emotion-specific effects, as clearly not all results can be explained by arousal or emotional salience alone.…”

“…To understand some of this complexity, the current study examined the influence of four potentially critical factors and their interactions, relating to: (1) emotion-specific effects, (2) the time course of attention effects, (3) contribution of voluntary or task-related attention, and (4) state-dependent effects. With reference to these factors, we were particularly interested in specifying the conditions that may restrict our previous conclusion stating that "disgust-but not fear-evoking images hold our attention" (Van Hooff, Devue, Vieweg, & Theeuwes, 2013).…”

Negative Emotion Impact Unconsciously Triggered Response Inhibition

“…)，这些研究为无意识认知控制的存在提供了直接的实验证据。 情绪对反应抑制的影响一直以来都是研究的热点，有研究表明，与任务无关的情绪图片会消耗注意 资源，从而阻碍反应抑制的表现 (De Houwer & Tibboel, 2010;Hartikainen, Siiskonen & Ogawa, 2012;Lindstrom & Bohlin, 2012;Verbruggen & De Houwer, 2007)；也有研究表明，情绪刺激能够促进反应抑制 的表现 (Pessoa, Padmala, Kenzer et al, 2012;Robinson, Krimsky & Grillon, 2013 (Carretie, Ruiz-Padial, Lopez-Martin et al, 2011;Krusemark & Li, 2011;Nicol, Perrotta, Caliciuri et al, 2013;Susskind, Lee, Cusi et al, 2008;van Hooff, Devue, Vieweg et al, 2013; Ver- 对阈下反应时做 3(中性、恐惧、厌恶)*2(go/no-go)的重复测量方差分析发现，两者交互作用不显著， F (2,21) = .678，p = .519；go/no-go 的主效应显著，F (2,21) = 9.504，p = .009，no-go 的反应时比 go 的反 应时要长。进一步分析表明，当情绪图片是中性时，出现了阈下的反应抑制，no-go 试次的反应时比 go 试次的更长，p = .06；当情绪图片是恐惧时，no-go 试次的反应时比 go 试次的更长，p = .047；而当情绪…”