Event-related potential correlates of the expectancy violation effect during emotional prosody processing

EEG oscillations reflect task effects for the change detection in vocal emotion

“…In contrast, deviant emotional notes elicited a late positive deflection (P300) in active oddball paradigm (Thierry and Roberts 2007;). The similar results were reported in cross-splicing paradigm, in which the contexts preceded the splicing point allow participants to establish context and the cross-spliced parts deviate the econtext and thus cause emotion change (Chen et al 2011;Kotz and Paulmann 2007;Paulmann and Kotz 2008). Kotz and Paulmann (2007) first reported that emotional expectancy violation in prosody elicitd a positive deflection 350 ms post changing point (Prosodic Expectancy Positivity, PEP).…”

“…And the following studies showed that emotional expectancy violation elicited PEP response irrespective of speaker voice, emotional category, and task demands (Paulmann et al 2012;Paulmann and Kotz 2008). Furthermore, the study in Mandrin Chinese also reported a positive deflection resemble to PEP, with an early negative response (N2) preceded it (Chen et al 2012;Chen et al 2011). In short, the studies addressing the time course of vocal emotion change perception suggest that the brain detects vocal emotion change at various stages, indexed by an early negative deflection (MMN/N2) and late posistive deflection (PEP/P300).…”

“…However, early studies adopting cross-splicing paradigm reported that vocal emotion expectancy violation elicited PEP independent of task relevance (Kotz and Paulmann 2007;Paulmann and Kotz 2008), implying that the processing of vocal emotion change is not primarily influenced by task focus. Nevertheless, our previous studies showed that prosodies with emotion change elicited an early negativity (N2) and a late positivity (P300) relative to prosodies without emotion change (Chen et al 2011(Chen et al , 2012. Further, while the early negativity was immune to task focus, the late positivity was modulated by task focus (Chen et al 2011).…”

“…Nevertheless, our previous studies showed that prosodies with emotion change elicited an early negativity (N2) and a late positivity (P300) relative to prosodies without emotion change (Chen et al 2011(Chen et al , 2012. Further, while the early negativity was immune to task focus, the late positivity was modulated by task focus (Chen et al 2011). Accordingly, it was proposed that these conflicting findings could be reconciled with the multistage model of vocal emotion perception (Schirmer and Kotz 2006;Wildgruber et al 2009), while the early negativity is associated with emotional significance deriving, the late positivity is corresponding to emotion evaluation and reintegration (Chen et al 2011).…”

Tracking the Sound of Human Affection: EEG Signals Reveal Online Decoding of Socio-Emotional Expression in Human Speech and Voice

“…The task relevance modulates the level of explicitness of emotional processing of vocal expression. One study presented mismatching and matching emotional prosody to listeners and asked them to judge the emotional congruency (where the emotional information is task relevant), or to verify the consistency between a visually presented lexical item and the statement [22]. Three ERP efects were elicited: an early negativity efect from 150 to 250 ms regardless of task relevance and the patern of mismatch, an early positivity from 250 to 450 ms only on angry voice which was preceded by a neutral voice but regardless task relevance, and a late positivity efect after 450 ms for the task that directed listener's atention to the emotional aspects of the vocal expression.…”