The impact of task-irrelevant emotional stimuli on attention in three domains.

Abstract

Whether task-irrelevant emotional stimuli facilitate or disrupt attention performance may depend on a range of factors, such as emotion type, task difficulty, and stimulus duration. Few studies, however, have systematically examined the influence of these factors on attention performance. Sixty-three adults, scoring within a normative range for mood and anxiety symptoms, completed either an easy or difficult version of an attention task measuring three aspects of attention performance: alerting, orienting, and executive attention. Results showed that in the easy task only, threatening versus nonthreatening task-irrelevant emotional faces facilitated orienting regardless of stimulus duration. These effects were no longer significant during the difficult condition. When the easy and difficult conditions were examined together, duration effects emerged such that stimuli of longer durations lead to greater interference, although effects were nonlinear. Findings illustrate that threat-relevant emotional stimuli facilitate attention during tasks with low cognitive load, but underscore the importance of considering a range of task parameters. Results are discussed in the context of adaptive and maladaptive emotion-attention interactions.

Differences in autonomic functions as related to induced stress between children with and without cerebral palsy while performing a virtual meal-making task

“…Hence a simple interference effect may be an underlying mechanism. Previous studies in children (e.g., Dennis, 2010) and adults (O'Toole, Decicco, Hong, & Dennis, 2011) partially support the present study's outcomes, emphasizing the interplay between emotion and cognition. As seen in both the present study and elsewhere (Bottcher, 2010;Chang, Wu, Wu, & Su, 2005;Domellof, Rosblad, & Ronnqvist, 2009), children with CP have fundamental differences in motor and cognitive performance compared to typically developing peers.…”

“…In the present study, it may be that the use of a more pronounced affective stimulus would have elicited a stronger response by the children. The literature shows that the factors that contribute to intensity of emotional reactivity also relate to physical properties (e.g., picture size or duration of stimulus exposure), prior exposure to the presented stimulus, and individual differences (Codispoti & De Cesarei, 2007;O'Toole et al, 2011). Moreover, the use of more than one type of affective stimulus may lead to contamination of emotional effects across trials (O'Toole et al, 2011).…”

“…The literature shows that the factors that contribute to intensity of emotional reactivity also relate to physical properties (e.g., picture size or duration of stimulus exposure), prior exposure to the presented stimulus, and individual differences (Codispoti & De Cesarei, 2007;O'Toole et al, 2011). Moreover, the use of more than one type of affective stimulus may lead to contamination of emotional effects across trials (O'Toole et al, 2011). Since the current study was exploratory, it followed the approach that the natural daily environment includes many types of sensory stimuli, and it was therefore, more ecologically valid to present negative, positive and neutral stimuli during a virtual kitchen task.…”

Associations between parental ideology and neural sensitivity to cognitive conflict in children

“…On the other hand, other research suggests that low arousal, threatening stimuli may facilitate cognitive performance in general (Fenske & Eastwood, 2003; Gable & Harmon-Jones, 2010; O’Toole, DeCicco, Hong, & Dennis, 2011). Conflict monitoring, which is rapidly developing during this age period (Jonkman, 2006; Rueda et al, 2004; Rueda, Posner, & Rothbart, 2005), may have been facilitated in children of liberals because they, like their parents, have greater ability to devote resources to a task despite task-irrelevant and distracting negative stimuli.…”

Caregivers' attentional bias to pain

“…Following the protocol of previous studies, 36,46 all the reaction times that were 3SD above or below the mean were considered to be outliers and were deleted from the database (ie, 136 trials, 1.8% of the data after removing the incorrect trials). For each participant, the mean reaction times were aggregated based on stimuli type (ie, pain and happy stimuli) and congruency type (ie, congruent and incongruent).…”