2005
DOI: 10.1016/j.jns.2004.11.007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effects of arousing emotional scenes on the distribution of visuospatial attention: changes with aging and early subcortical vascular dementia

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

8
79
2
2

Year Published

2005
2005
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 96 publications
(91 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
8
79
2
2
Order By: Relevance
“…In Experiment 4, lingering longer over pictures at encoding enhanced picture recognition but not picture-location conjunction memory. In addition, being shown on the screen at the same time as an arousing picture did not influence picture-location binding, despite the fact that previous research demonstrates that when a non-arousing and an arousing picture are shown together on a screen, people look longer at the arousing picture (e.g., Knight et al, under review;LaBar, Mesulam, Gitelman, & Weintraub, 2000;Rosler et al, 2005). Thus, looking time does not seem to influence picture-location binding, at least not in an incidental encoding task in which there is sufficient time (i.e., 2000 ms in Experiment 3) to look at both of the pictures on the screen.…”
Section: Mechanisms Of Arousal-enhanced Bindingmentioning
confidence: 87%
“…In Experiment 4, lingering longer over pictures at encoding enhanced picture recognition but not picture-location conjunction memory. In addition, being shown on the screen at the same time as an arousing picture did not influence picture-location binding, despite the fact that previous research demonstrates that when a non-arousing and an arousing picture are shown together on a screen, people look longer at the arousing picture (e.g., Knight et al, under review;LaBar, Mesulam, Gitelman, & Weintraub, 2000;Rosler et al, 2005). Thus, looking time does not seem to influence picture-location binding, at least not in an incidental encoding task in which there is sufficient time (i.e., 2000 ms in Experiment 3) to look at both of the pictures on the screen.…”
Section: Mechanisms Of Arousal-enhanced Bindingmentioning
confidence: 87%
“…There is some evidence for example that the processing of highly negative, threatening stimuli is preserved with age (Mather and Knight, 2006;Rösler et al, 2005;Wright et al, 2006), while other studies have found an age-related reduction in negative emotional processing (Mather and Carstensen, 2005). It would be of interest therefore to examine age-related changes in negative emotional processing by isolating the contributory effects of valence and arousal.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Emotional arousal or intensity is thought to reflect the motivational value of an emotion (Lang et al, 1998), and has a strong effect on cognition, enhancing attention (Davis and Whalen, 2001;Fox et al, 2001) and also memory, via the increased activation of the amygdala and hippocampus (Cahill et al, 1996;Dolcos et al, 2004;Kensinger and Schacter, 2006;Richardson et al, 2004). There is some evidence that automatic arousal processing is relatively stable in old age, with older adults showing the same ability as young adults to detect high arousing stimuli (Leclerc and Kensinger, 2008), and threatening stimuli such as highly arousing negative scenes from the international affective picture system (IAPS) (Rösler et al, 2005), or threatening faces (Mather and Knight, 2006). There have been conflicting reports of older adults' autonomic response to emotional arousal however.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…During an unannounced, post-experiment word memory task, a positivity effect emerged in that older participants recognized a higher proportion of positive relative to negative words, suggesting possibly automatic, effortless processing of emotional information. Moreover, when measuring fixation preferences to emotional-neutral and emotional-emotional image pairs, Rosler A et al, [30] found no difference in positivity bias between a group of older healthy and a group of mildly cognitively impaired individuals: both preferred to fixate away from negative and towards neutral images as compared to young adults.…”
Section: Does the Positivity Bias Implicate Cognitive Effort?mentioning
confidence: 99%