| Literature DB >> 21489277 |
Agustín Ibáñez1, Esteban Hurtado, Rodrigo Riveros, Hugo Urquina, Juan F Cardona, Agustín Petroni, Alejandro Lobos-Infante, Joaquin Barutta, Sandra Baez, Facundo Manes.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Integration of compatible or incompatible emotional valence and semantic information is an essential aspect of complex social interactions. A modified version of the Implicit Association Test (IAT) called Dual Valence Association Task (DVAT) was designed in order to measure conflict resolution processing from compatibility/incompatibly of semantic and facial valence. The DVAT involves two emotional valence evaluative tasks which elicits two forms of emotional compatible/incompatible associations (facial and semantic).Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2011 PMID: 21489277 PMCID: PMC3087672 DOI: 10.1186/1744-9081-7-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Behav Brain Funct ISSN: 1744-9081 Impact factor: 3.759
Figure 1Sequence representation for compatible test block. A. The schema shows a face and a word sequence presentation and the participant's response. Face and word trials are alternately presented for a short time, strictly. Positive and negative faces, along with words of positive and negative valence, are present in the stimuli set and are presented in a randomized sequence. The participant is required to classify each stimulus to the left or to the right according to labels displayed on top of the screen. When a classification response error is made, negative feedback is given (i.e., in the word sequence illustrated in the figure). B. During the incompatible block test the valence classification of a face (e.g., happy-left vs. angry-right) must be classified in the opposite valence direction of the word (unpleasant-left vs. pleasant-right). When items from compatible categories (e.g. happy + pleasant) share a response key, performance is faster and more accurate than when items from incongruent categories (e.g. angry + pleasant) share a key
Descriptive statistics of DVAT (accuracy and reaction times).
| Category | Accuracy (%) | Reaction Times (ms) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 93 | 3,6 | 890 | 221 | |
| 85 | 6,7 | 970 | 243 | |
| 91 | 5,6 | 1187 | 283 | |
| 87 | 3,8 | 1140 | 212 | |
| 94 | 4,2 | 1220 | 287 | |
| 83 | 5,3 | 1662 | 287 | |
| 81 | 5,6 | 1634 | 298 | |
| 92 | 4,4 | 1303 | 245 | |
| Total | 88,25 | 4,9 | 1250 | 258 |
Figure 2N170 waveform and topography. N170 component elicited by emotional words and faces. The N170 modulation is predominant in the left hemisphere for words and in the right for faces. Boxes in ERPs figures are indicative of regions where statistical comparison shown significant differences. Right side of the figure: Word and Face voltage maps averaged on 140-190 ms. Abbreviations: Word P-A (pleasant words associated to anger face); Word U-A (unpleasant words associated to anger face); Face H-P (happy faces associated to pleasant word); Face H-U (happy faces associated to unpleasant word); Face A-U (anger faces associated to unpleasant word); Face A-P (anger faces associated to pleasant word).
Figure 3Frontal LPP. Selected ROIs of LPP elicited by faces and words in response to Incompatible (continuous line) and Compatible tasks (dashed line). Top: ERPs of Faces. Bottom: ERPs of Words. In agreement with the behavioral results, we found a LPP modulation related to incompatible blocks. Note the lateralization effects for word stimuli and the bilateral effects for faces.