Mood state dissociates conflict adaptation within tasks and across tasks.

Schuch, Stefanie; Pütz, Sebastian

doi:10.1037/xlm0000530

Cited by 11 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 66 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Besides the stimulusdriven disruptive effect of unpleasant stimuli on cognitive control adjustments (Padmala et al, 2011), control adaptations seem to also be dependent on one's emotional state. Some studies suggest that unpleasant affective states will prioritize conflict processing, which will strengthen cognitive control adjustments (e.g., van Steenbergen et al, 2010;Schuch and Pütz, 2018). Although we cannot discard the possible influences of emotional states on control adjustments in our study, we found electrophysiological evidence that the influence of the previous trial WM load on distracter processing is absent (i.e., there is no control adaptation) when the distracter presents unpleasant content.…”

Section: Adjustments In Cognitive Control May Be Reduced During An Uncontrasting

confidence: 47%

Controlling Unpleasant Thoughts: Adjustments of Cognitive Control Based on Previous-Trial Load in a Working Memory Task

Pacheco

Figueira

Pereira

et al. 2020

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dynamic cognitive control adjustments are important for integrating thoughts and actions that take place during dynamic changes of environmental demands and support goal-directed behavior. We investigated, in a working memory (WM) paradigm, whether dynamic adjustments in cognitive control based on previous trial load influence the neural response to neutral or unpleasant distracters. We also investigated whether individual self-reported abilities in controlling thoughts influence this effect. Participants performed a WM change detection task with low or high WM-related cognitive demands. An unpleasant or a neutral distractive image was presented at the beginning of each trial, prior to the WM task. We tested for control adjustments that were associated with the load level of the preceding trial task (N-1) on the neural response to the subsequent distractive image. We found an effect of the prior WM task load on a parieto-occipital waveform event-related potential (ERP) that appeared between 200 and 300 ms after the neutral distracter onset. This effect was not observed for the unpleasant distracter. Individual ability for controlling thoughts may influence the effect of cognitive control adjustments on distracter processing during the unpleasant condition. These findings provide evidence that: (1) dynamic cognitive control adjustments are impaired by unpleasant distracters; and (2) the ability to control unpleasant thoughts is linked to individual differences in flexible cognitive control adjustments and shielding of WM representations from unpleasant distracters.

show abstract

Section: Adjustments In Cognitive Control May Be Reduced During An Uncontrasting

confidence: 47%

Controlling Unpleasant Thoughts: Adjustments of Cognitive Control Based on Previous-Trial Load in a Working Memory Task

Pacheco

Figueira

Pereira

et al. 2020

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Experimental evidence for the affect ► control link Many studies have reported an affective modulation of control by tonic affect. These studies induced mood states with movie clips (Schuch & Koch, 2015), music and imagination (van Steenbergen, Band, & Hommel, 2010), cartoons (van Steenbergen, Band, Hommel, Rombouts, & Nieuwenhuis, 2015, approach/avoidance gestures (Hengstler, Holland, van Steenbergen, & van Knippenberg, 2014), mock feedback on either intelligence tests (Schuch & Pütz, 2018;Schuch, Zweerings, Hirsch, & Koch, 2017) or task performance (Yang & Pourtois, 2018), or particular screen colors (X. Wang, Zhao, Xue, & Chen, 2016).…”

Section: Conflict-triggered Affect Drives Control Adaptation-the Affementioning

confidence: 99%

Conflict monitoring and the affective-signaling hypothesis—An integrative review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conflict-monitoring theory proposes that conflict between incompatible responses is registered by a dedicated monitoring system, and that this conflict signal triggers changes of attentional filters and adapts control processes according to the current task demands. Extending the conflict-monitoring theory, it has been suggested that conflict elicits a negative affective reaction, and that it is this affective signal that is monitored and then triggers control adaptation. This review article summarizes research on a potential signaling function of affect for cognitive control. First, we provide an overview of the conflict-monitoring theory, discuss neurophysiological and behavioral markers of monitoring and control adaptation, and introduce the affective-signaling hypothesis. In a second part, we review relevant studies that address the questions of (i) whether conflict elicits negative affect, (ii) whether negative affect is monitored, and (iii) whether affect modulates control. In sum, the reviewed literature supports the claim that conflict and errors trigger negative affect and provides some support for the claim that affect modulates control. However, studies on the monitoring of negative affect and the influence of phasic affect on control are ambiguous. On the basis of these findings, in a third part, we critically reassess the affective-signaling hypothesis, discuss relevant challenges to this account, and suggest future research strategies.

show abstract

“…Apart from response-selection bottleneck models that predict a PRP effect only in the RT (e.g., Pashler, 1994), dual-task models, such as the capacity sharing model (Tombu & Jolicoeur, 2003) and the ECTVA model (Logan & Gordon, 2001), can account for SOA effects in RTs and error rates, thus justifying the use of integrated measures. Moreover, integrated measures have already been used in the task-switching domain (e.g., Draheim, Hicks, & Engle, 2016;Schuch & Pütz, 2018) and the dual-task domain (Han & Marois, 2013;Kunde, Pfister, & Janczyk, 2012).…”

Section: Use Of Integrated Speed-accuracy Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Common Cognitive Control Processes Underlying Performance in Task-Switching and Dual-Task Contexts

Hirsch

Nolden

Declerck

et al. 2018

ACP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

cognitive control, task switching, dual tasks, PrP effectin the present study, participants performed highly comparable task-switching and dual-task paradigms, and the paradigm-specific performance costs were analysed in the context of the commonly postulated core components of cognitive control (i.e., working memory updating, inhibition, and shifting). in the task-switching paradigm, we found switch costs (i.e., switch trials vs. repetition trials) and mixing costs (i.e., repetition trials in mixed-task blocks vs. single-task trials). in the dual-task paradigm, we observed a psychological refractory period (PrP) effect (i.e., task 2 [t2] performance after short stimulus-onset asynchrony [soA] vs. long soA), dual-task costs (i.e., t2 dual-task performance with a long soA in trials with a task repetition between task 1 [t1] and t2 vs. single-task performance), and switch costs in t2 (i.e., dual-task performance in trials with a switch between t1 and t2 vs. dual-task performance in trials with a repetition between t1 and t2). A within-subjects comparison of the performance costs showed a correlation between mixing costs and dual-task costs, possibly indicating shared underlying cognitive control processes in terms of working memory updating. surprisingly, there was also a correlation between switch costs and the PrP effect, presumably suggesting that cognitive control, as opposed to passive queuing of response selection processes, contributes to the PrP effect. corresponding author: Patricia hirsch, cognitive and experimental Psychology, institute AbstrAct Keywords

show abstract

Mood state dissociates conflict adaptation within tasks and across tasks.

Cited by 11 publications

References 66 publications

Controlling Unpleasant Thoughts: Adjustments of Cognitive Control Based on Previous-Trial Load in a Working Memory Task

Controlling Unpleasant Thoughts: Adjustments of Cognitive Control Based on Previous-Trial Load in a Working Memory Task

Conflict monitoring and the affective-signaling hypothesis—An integrative review

Common Cognitive Control Processes Underlying Performance in Task-Switching and Dual-Task Contexts

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About