Literature DB >> 27055094

Don't like what you see? Give it time: Longer reaction times associated with increased positive affect.

Maital Neta1, Tien T Tong1.   

Abstract

Images with an ambiguous valence (e.g., surprised facial expressions) are interpreted by some people as having a negative valence, and by others, as having a more positive valence. Despite these individual differences in valence bias, the more automatic interpretation is negative, and positivity appears to require regulation. Interestingly, extant research has shown that there is an age-related positivity effect such that relative to young adults, older adults attend to and remember positive more than negative information. In this report, the authors show that this positivity effect extends to emotional ambiguity (Experiment 1). Eighty participants (aged 19-71, 42 females) rated the valence of images with a clear or ambiguous valence. They found that age correlated with valence bias, such that older adults showed a more positive bias, and they took longer to rate images, than younger adults. They also found that this increase in reaction times was sufficient to bias positivity (Experiment 2). Thirty-four participants (aged 18-28, 24 females) rated ambiguous and clear images, before and after an instruction to delay their RTs. They also found that although ratings among individuals with a positive bias did not change, those with a negative bias became more positive when encouraged to delay. Indeed, participants with the strongest negativity bias showed the greatest increase in RTs. Taken together, this work demonstrates that the valence bias, which represents a stable, trait-like difference across people, can be moved in the positive direction, at least temporarily, when participants are encouraged to take their time and consider alternatives. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27055094     DOI: 10.1037/emo0000181

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Emotion        ISSN: 1528-3542


  14 in total

1.  Social evaluations under conflict: negative judgments of conflicting information are easier than positive judgments.

Authors:  Hannah U Nohlen; Frenk van Harreveld; William A Cunningham
Journal:  Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci       Date:  2019-07-31       Impact factor: 3.436

Review 2.  Temporal dynamics of affect in the brain: Evidence from human imaging and animal models.

Authors:  Nikki A Puccetti; William J Villano; Jonathan P Fadok; Aaron S Heller
Journal:  Neurosci Biobehav Rev       Date:  2021-12-11       Impact factor: 8.989

3.  Exploring valence bias as a metric for frontoamygdalar connectivity and depressive symptoms in childhood.

Authors:  Nathan M Petro; Nim Tottenham; Maital Neta
Journal:  Dev Psychobiol       Date:  2021-01-05       Impact factor: 3.038

4.  Positivity effect in aging: evidence for the primacy of positive responses to emotional ambiguity.

Authors:  Nathan M Petro; Ruby Basyouni; Maital Neta
Journal:  Neurobiol Aging       Date:  2021-06-22       Impact factor: 5.133

5.  The dynamic process of ambiguous emotion perception.

Authors:  Maital Neta; Michael M Berkebile; Jonathan B Freeman
Journal:  Cogn Emot       Date:  2020-12-24

6.  vmPFC activation during a stressor predicts positive emotions during stress recovery.

Authors:  Xi Yang; Katelyn M Garcia; Youngkyoo Jung; Christopher T Whitlow; Kateri McRae; Christian E Waugh
Journal:  Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci       Date:  2018-03-01       Impact factor: 3.436

7.  Decision-Making Based on Social Conventional Rules by Elderly People.

Authors:  Hidetsugu Komeda; Yoko Eguchi; Takashi Kusumi; Yuka Kato; Jin Narumoto; Masaru Mimura
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2018-08-13

8.  One step at a time: Physical activity is linked to positive interpretations of ambiguity.

Authors:  Maital Neta; Nicholas R Harp; Daniel J Henley; Safiya E Beckford; Karsten Koehler
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-11-14       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Cortisol responses enhance negative valence perception for ambiguous facial expressions.

Authors:  Catherine C Brown; Candace M Raio; Maital Neta
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-11-08       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  Individual differences in valence bias: fMRI evidence of the initial negativity hypothesis.

Authors:  Nathan M Petro; Tien T Tong; Daniel J Henley; Maital Neta
Journal:  Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci       Date:  2018-09-04       Impact factor: 3.436

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.