Load-dependent modulation of affective picture processing

Abstract

Because of the biological significance of emotional stimuli, their processing is considered largely automatic. In the study reported herein, we tested the alternative hypothesis-namely, that the processing of emotional stimuli requires some level of attention. Our experiments utilized highly negative and arousing visual stimuli comprising mutilated bodies. All experiments employed a single task, which consisted of determining whether two peripheral bars were like oriented or not, thereby eliminating potential task-difference confounds that may have contaminated prior studies. Our results revealed that task-irrelevant unpleasant images slowed reaction time during the performance of the main task. Such interference was modulated by task difficulty as well as by alcohol consumption, showing that the processing of emotional visual stimuli is not immune to attentional manipulations. These results suggest that it is essential to utilize attentional manipulations that more fully consume attentional resources in order to demonstrate that the processing of emotional stimuli is resource limited.

Tuning down the emotional brain: An fMRI study of the effects of cognitive load on the processing of affective images

“…More specifically, performing an attention-demanding task has been found to attenuate the emotional impact of negative stimuli (Erber and Tesser, 1992;Erthal et al, 2005;Glynn et al, 2002;Morrow and Nolen-Hoeksema, 1990;Pessoa et al, 2002;Van Dillen and Koole, 2007;in press). In recent years, the neural effects of task load on processing of emotional stimuli have begun to receive more systematic attention.…”

“…From this perspective, cognitive load may cause an emotionally relevant stimulus to simply bypass emotional circuits. Given that most prior research relied on demanding distractor tasks that visually competed with emotional information (Erthal et al, 2005;Okon-Singer et al, 2007;Pessoa et al, 2002), cognitive load may have led participants to overlook some of the emotional information.…”

Common regions of dorsal anterior cingulate and prefrontal–parietal cortices provide attentional control of distracters varying in emotionality and visibility

“…However, this was not an emotional Stroop paradigm and previous work has demonstrated that emotional distracters can cause representational interference ,Erthal et al, 2005Harris & Pashler, 2004;Mitchell et al, 2006,Okon-Singer et al, 2007,Strange et al, 2003. Of course, in many of these studies the emotional distracters have been visual images ,Erthal et al, 2005Mitchell et al, 2006; though see Harris & Pashler, 2004;Strange et al, 2003). It is possible that while the distracters were sufficiently salient to require additional attentional control, they were not sufficiently salient to actually interfere with behavioral performance.…”

“…Previous work has shown that emotional stimuli cause greater interference than neutral stimuli Erthal et al, 2005;Harris & Pashler, 2004;Mitchell et al 2006Mitchell et al ,2007Pessoa et al, 2003;Vuilleumier et al, 2001). This is thought to reflect reciprocal connections between the amygdala and temporal and occipital cortex; the amygdala augments the activation of sensory representations of emotional distracters within occipital and temporal cortex LeDoux, 1996;Mitchell et al, 2007;Pessoa et al, 2002;Vuilleumier et al, 2004).…”

“…Distracters immediately preceding target stimuli detrimentally impact the processing of the target stimuli (Broadbent & Broadbent, 1987). Indeed, while emotional distracters presented simultaneously with task relevant stimuli cause interference infrequently (Bar-Haim et al, 2007;Williams et al, 1996; though see, Erthal et al, 2005;Harris & Pashler, 2004;Okon-Singer et al, 2007). However, when emotional distracters and the target stimuli are presently serially in a rapid visual stream, interference is frequently reported ,Mitchell et al, 2006Strange et al, 2003).…”