Limits...
Identification of angry faces in the attentional blink.

Maratos FA, Mogg K, Bradley BP - Cogn Emot (2008)

Bottom Line: To test this hypothesis, the present study used a modified version of the rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) paradigm to investigate the effect of emotional face stimuli on the attentional blink (AB).The target stimuli were schematic faces which depicted threatening (angry), positive or neutral facial expressions.These findings further support the proposal that, when there is competition for attentional resources, threat stimuli are given higher priority in processing compared with non-threatening stimuli.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.

ABSTRACT
According to cognitive and neural theories of emotion, attentional processing of innate threat stimuli, such as angry facial expressions, is prioritised over neutral stimuli. To test this hypothesis, the present study used a modified version of the rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) paradigm to investigate the effect of emotional face stimuli on the attentional blink (AB). The target stimuli were schematic faces which depicted threatening (angry), positive or neutral facial expressions. Results showed that performance accuracy was enhanced (i.e., the AB was reduced) on trials in which the second target was an angry face, rather than a neutral face. Results extend previous research by demonstrating that angry faces reduce the AB, and that this effect is found for schematic facial expressions. These findings further support the proposal that, when there is competition for attentional resources, threat stimuli are given higher priority in processing compared with non-threatening stimuli.

No MeSH data available.


Mean percentage of correct answers (with standard error bars) on double-target trials; i.e., trials in which both the number of targets and expression of the second target were correctly identified. The T1 was a neutral face and the T2 was a threat, positive, or a different neutral face; i.e., trial type refers to emotional content of the T2 face.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC2666369&req=5

fig3: Mean percentage of correct answers (with standard error bars) on double-target trials; i.e., trials in which both the number of targets and expression of the second target were correctly identified. The T1 was a neutral face and the T2 was a threat, positive, or a different neutral face; i.e., trial type refers to emotional content of the T2 face.

Mentions: Figure 3 shows the mean percentage of double-target trials with correct responses (i.e., trials where both the number and type of target were correctly identified); these data are illustrated as a function of Trial Type (threat, positive, neutral) and Lag (seven levels). An ANOVA of the percentage of correct responses, with Trial Type and lag as independent variables, revealed significant main effects of Trial Type, F(2, 38) = 10.22, p < .01, , and Lag, F(6, 114) = 16.12, p < .001, , and a significant interaction between the two, F(12, 228) = 1.93, p < .05, .


Identification of angry faces in the attentional blink.

Maratos FA, Mogg K, Bradley BP - Cogn Emot (2008)

Mean percentage of correct answers (with standard error bars) on double-target trials; i.e., trials in which both the number of targets and expression of the second target were correctly identified. The T1 was a neutral face and the T2 was a threat, positive, or a different neutral face; i.e., trial type refers to emotional content of the T2 face.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC2666369&req=5

fig3: Mean percentage of correct answers (with standard error bars) on double-target trials; i.e., trials in which both the number of targets and expression of the second target were correctly identified. The T1 was a neutral face and the T2 was a threat, positive, or a different neutral face; i.e., trial type refers to emotional content of the T2 face.
Mentions: Figure 3 shows the mean percentage of double-target trials with correct responses (i.e., trials where both the number and type of target were correctly identified); these data are illustrated as a function of Trial Type (threat, positive, neutral) and Lag (seven levels). An ANOVA of the percentage of correct responses, with Trial Type and lag as independent variables, revealed significant main effects of Trial Type, F(2, 38) = 10.22, p < .01, , and Lag, F(6, 114) = 16.12, p < .001, , and a significant interaction between the two, F(12, 228) = 1.93, p < .05, .

Bottom Line: To test this hypothesis, the present study used a modified version of the rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) paradigm to investigate the effect of emotional face stimuli on the attentional blink (AB).The target stimuli were schematic faces which depicted threatening (angry), positive or neutral facial expressions.These findings further support the proposal that, when there is competition for attentional resources, threat stimuli are given higher priority in processing compared with non-threatening stimuli.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.

ABSTRACT
According to cognitive and neural theories of emotion, attentional processing of innate threat stimuli, such as angry facial expressions, is prioritised over neutral stimuli. To test this hypothesis, the present study used a modified version of the rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) paradigm to investigate the effect of emotional face stimuli on the attentional blink (AB). The target stimuli were schematic faces which depicted threatening (angry), positive or neutral facial expressions. Results showed that performance accuracy was enhanced (i.e., the AB was reduced) on trials in which the second target was an angry face, rather than a neutral face. Results extend previous research by demonstrating that angry faces reduce the AB, and that this effect is found for schematic facial expressions. These findings further support the proposal that, when there is competition for attentional resources, threat stimuli are given higher priority in processing compared with non-threatening stimuli.

No MeSH data available.