Sensitivity to emotional scene content outside the focus of attention

Calvo, Manuel G.; Gutiérrez-García, Aida; Líbano, Mario Del

doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2015.08.002

Cited by 18 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 59 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In favor of generalization of the selective orienting advantage for pleasant scenes, there are the following data and argument. In a previous study (Calvo et al, 2015), the same emotional scenes were presented also in peripheral vision, albeit paired with their own scrambled, meaningless images. For females, sensitivity to both pleasant and unpleasant scenes was comparable, and was greater for both than for neutral scenes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Specifically females were included because in a previous study (Calvo, Gutiérrez-García, & del Líbano, 2015) with the same emotional stimuli, but a different paradigm assessing interference, females were similarly sensitive to pleasant and unpleasant scenes relative to neutral ones in peripheral vision, whereas males were less sensitive to unpleasant than to pleasant scenes. This constituted a baseline for the current study.…”

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Prior to the experiment, a norming study was conducted to obtain affective valence and arousal ratings of the scene stimuli from 34 new female undergraduates with the same background as those in the current experiment (see Calvo et al, 2015). Participants were presented with 288 pictures (72, pleasant; 72, unpleasant; 144, neutral), and rated each scene valence (in a 1-unpleasant-to 9-pleasant-scale), and arousal (in a 1-calm-to 9-tension-scale), using the standard SAM (self-assessment mannequin) procedure .…”

Section: Assessment Of Scene Emotional Valence and Arousalmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Selective orienting to pleasant versus unpleasant visual scenes

Fernández-Martín

Calvo

2016

Cognition

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Assessment Of Scene Emotional Valence and Arousalmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Selective orienting to pleasant versus unpleasant visual scenes

Fernández-Martín

Calvo

2016

Cognition

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Although RTs are often used to index attention to emotional stimuli (Calvo et al, 2015;Ferrari, Bruno, Chattat, & Codispoti, 2016;Hartikainen et al, 2000;Padmala & Pessoa, 2014;Weinberg & Hajcak, 2011), they are executed after a sequence of processing stages following the actual attention allocation to the stimulus, and therefore several factors might affect behavioral interference. On the other hand, the LPP is a much more temporally proximal measure of the evaluative processes involved.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The fate of unattended stimuli and emotional habituation: Behavioral interference and cortical changes

Codispoti

Cesarei

Biondi

et al. 2016

Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The interference produced by the viewing of emotional distractors has been interpreted as evidence that emotional cues are processed in a fairly mandatory fashion, and that they divert attention from the primary ongoing task. However, few studies have examined how behavioral emotional interference varies with repeated presentation of the same emotional distractors. In two experiments, while participants were engaged in a parity judgment task, we investigated the effects of repetition of task-irrelevant emotional pictures, as reflected in both behavioral interference (Experiments 1 and 2) and neural activity (Experiment 2). Both experiments showed that the slowing of reaction times that was observed when viewing emotional, compared to neutral, scenes disappeared after only a few repetitions, suggesting diminished attention allocation to repeated emotional pictures. Conversely, in Experiment 2, neural correlates of picture processing revealed that the late positive potential (LPP) amplitude continued to be enhanced for emotional, compared to neutral, distractors despite picture repetition and the presence of a concurrent task. Altogether, these findings suggest that while evaluative processes are mandatory, and continue to engage cortico-limbic appetitive and defensive systems even after massive repetition, as suggested by the affective modulation of the LPP, attentional processes are not necessary after several repetitions of the same stimulus, as indicated by the rapid decline of behavioral emotional interference.

show abstract

“…It appears that, overall, negative images presented extrafoveally produced a more robust LPP ERP than did the same images when they were presented foveally. Emotional stimuli take processing priority outside the focus of overt attention, thus decreasing processing for nonemotional extrafoveal stimuli (Calvo, Gutierrez-Garcia, & Del Libano, 2015;Carretie, 2014). Previous research supports the notion that emotional stimuli can reliably be discriminated from neutral scenes when presented extrafoveally (Calvo, Rodriguez-Chinea, & Fernandez-Martin, 2015).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 68%

Positive affective priming decreases the middle late positive potential response to negative images

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionThis study aims to expand on previous literature showing that incidental emotion state priming in a specific domain leads to a higher probability that the primed emotion domain will be activated during a subsequent task.MethodsTo that end, we investigated the influence of happy, fearful, and neutral incidental emotion state priming on subsequent responses to emotionally negative and neutral pictures, measured by the event‐related potential (ERP) late positive potential (LPP). New to our study, we examined the influence of affective priming on the LPP response (analyzed separately at early and middle latency ranges) to emotional pictures in both the foveal and extrafoveal presentation locations.ResultsFollowing both fearful and neutral incidental state priming, both the early and middle LPP latency ranges overwhelmingly differentiated between negative and neutral pictures. Following happy incidental state priming, however, the LPP response failed to differentiate between negative and neutral pictures by the middle LPP latency range (800–1,000 ms). These results suggest that incidental happy states can have a protective effect when viewing aversive stimuli. Additionally, the LPP showed greater sensitivity to negative stimuli when presented extrafoveally compared to foveally.ConclusionsOverall, our findings suggest that incidental affective state and stimulus location influence emotional processing differentially for emotionally negative and emotionally neutral stimuli.

show abstract

Sensitivity to emotional scene content outside the focus of attention

Cited by 18 publications

References 59 publications

Selective orienting to pleasant versus unpleasant visual scenes

Selective orienting to pleasant versus unpleasant visual scenes

The fate of unattended stimuli and emotional habituation: Behavioral interference and cortical changes

Positive affective priming decreases the middle late positive potential response to negative images

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About