No evidence that self-rated negative emotion boosts visual working memory precision.

Abstract

Emotion is assumed to change how people process information by modulating attentional focus. Two recent studies (Spachtholz, Kuhbandner, & Pekrun, 2014;Xie & Zhang, 2016) reported that self-reported negative emotion boosted the precision with which information was stored in visual working memory. Here we attempted and failed to replicate these findings across 7 studies conducted in four countries. Emotion was induced by presenting emotional images (negative, neutral, and positive) before each trial of a visual working memory task (6 experiments) or the images were combined with emotional music during a 3-min induction phase (1 experiment) occurring prior to the memory task. In the visual working memory task, participants stored (emotionally-neutral) continuously-varying colored dots or oriented triangles. At test, the color or orientation of a probed item was reproduced. Although participants reported changes in their emotional state commensurate with the manipulations, six experiments showed substantial evidence against changes in visual working memory precision (and quantity) under negative (and positive) emotion in comparison to neutral; whereas one condition, in one study, showed increased precision under both negative and positive emotion compared to neutral. These results challenge the view that emotion modulates visual working memory quality and quantity.

Induced Negative Arousal Modulates the Speed of Visual Working Memory Consolidation

“…For example, induced negative arousal may boost the precision aspect of retained WM content (Long, Ye, Li, Tian, & Liu, 2020;Spachtholz et al, 2014;Xie & Zhang, 2016a) and disrupt control-related WM processes (Choi et al, 2013;Schoofs, Preuß, & Wolf, 2008;Shackman et al, 2006). However, much of the evidence for these immediate effects of negative arousal on WM is mixed (Schweizer et al, 2019;Souza et al, 2020). Considering that WM briefly retains a small amount of information to support a wide array of cognitive and perceptual functions (Baddeley, 2012b;Cowan, 2001), the uncertainty about how emotion influences WM poses a great challenge to the understanding of the relationships between emotion and cognition across various areas of experimental psychology (Baddeley, 2012a).…”

“…One possibility is that emotion does not impact WM at all, as the WM system should operate robustly under any emotional contexts, especially when an emotional context is irrelevant to the to-be-remembered WM task contents (Souza et al, 2020; but see Baddeley, 2012a). However, this assertion appears to be at odds with the rich empirical observations that emotion often influences observers' WM task performance (e.g., Choi et al, 2013;Long et al, 2020;Schoofs et al, 2008;Shackman et al, 2006;Souza et al, 2020;Spachtholz et al, 2014;Xie & Zhang, 2016a;Y. Zhang, Zhang, & Liu, 2017).…”

“…The overall cognitive effects of emotion, including the potential impact of negative arousal on WM consolidation, may be modulated or even masked by some critical individual differences, such as observers' sensitivity to arousal induction (Bloise & Johnson, 2007;Elzinga & Roelofs, 2005;Larsen & Diener, 1987) and their past experiences in responses to stress (Chen & Baram, 2016;McLaughlin, Sheridan, & Lambert, 2014). However, these key moderators are often neglected or considered as background noise in previous studies of induced negative arousal and WM, adding to the uncertainty concerning how emotion influences WM (Souza et al, 2020). These moderators are testable using meta-analysis of existing data (Rosenthal & DiMatteo, 2001).…”

“…We first consider the effectiveness of arousal induction as a moderator. Some previous studies have used subjective reports as a proxy measure of this moderator (Long et al, 2020;Souza et al, 2020;Xie & Zhang, 2016a). However, these subjective reports sometimes do not correspond with induced emotional experiences captured by more objective physiological responses (Lang, 1970;Miers, Blöte, Sumter, Kallen, & Westenberg, 2011).…”

“…However, these subjective reports sometimes do not correspond with induced emotional experiences captured by more objective physiological responses (Lang, 1970;Miers, Blöte, Sumter, Kallen, & Westenberg, 2011). Consequently, the reliance on subjective reports can yield mixed experimental findings in the literature (Souza et al, 2020). To resolve this issue, a more objective measure for the effectiveness of arousal induction is required, for example, the extent to which an observer's pupil dilates under negative relative to neutral IADS stimuli (e.g., Partala & Surakka, 2003).…”