Literature DB >> 29546688

Cognitive-behavioral and electrophysiological evidence of the affective consequences of ignoring stimulus representations in working memory.

David De Vito1, Anne E Ferrey2, Mark J Fenske2, Naseem Al-Aidroos2.   

Abstract

Ignoring visual stimuli in the external environment leads to decreased liking of those items, a phenomenon attributed to the affective consequences of attentional inhibition. Here we investigated the generality of this "distractor devaluation" phenomenon by asking whether ignoring stimuli represented internally within visual working memory has the same affective consequences. In two experiments we presented participants with two or three visual stimuli and then, after the stimuli were no longer visible, provided an attentional cue indicating which item in memory was the target they would have to later recall, and which were task-irrelevant distractors. Participants subsequently judged how much they liked these stimuli. Previously-ignored distractors were consistently rated less favorably than targets, replicating prior findings of distractor devaluation. To gain converging evidence, in Experiment 2, we also examined the electrophysiological processes associated with devaluation by measuring individual differences in attention (N2pc) and working memory (CDA) event-related potentials following the attention cue. Larger amplitude of an N2pc-like component was associated with greater devaluation, suggesting that individuals displaying more effective selection of memory targets-an act aided by distractor inhibition-displayed greater levels of distractor devaluation. Individuals showing a larger post-cue CDA amplitude (but not pre-cue CDA amplitude) also showed greater distractor devaluation, supporting prior evidence that visual working-memory resources have a functional role in effecting devaluation. Together, these findings demonstrate that ignoring working-memory representations has affective consequences, and adds to the growing evidence that the contribution of selective-attention mechanisms to a wide range of human thoughts and behaviors leads to devaluation.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Attention; ERP; Emotion; Working memory

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29546688     DOI: 10.3758/s13415-018-0580-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci        ISSN: 1530-7026            Impact factor:   3.282


  43 in total

1.  Electrophysiological measurement of rapid shifts of attention during visual search.

Authors:  G F Woodman; S J Luck
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1999-08-26       Impact factor: 49.962

2.  The magical number 4 in short-term memory: a reconsideration of mental storage capacity.

Authors:  N Cowan
Journal:  Behav Brain Sci       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 12.579

3.  When do motor behaviors (mis)match affective stimuli? An evaluative coding view of approach and avoidance reactions.

Authors:  Andreas B Eder; Klaus Rothermund
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  2008-05

4.  The role of age and inhibitory efficiency in working memory processing and storage components.

Authors:  Mervin Blair; Kiran K Vadaga; Joni Shuchat; Karen Z H Li
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2011-02-04       Impact factor: 2.143

5.  Electrophysiological correlates of feature analysis during visual search.

Authors:  S J Luck; S A Hillyard
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  1994-05       Impact factor: 4.016

6.  Cognition-emotion interactions are modulated by working memory capacity in individuals with schizophrenia.

Authors:  Gregory P Strauss; Bern G Lee; James A Waltz; Benjamin M Robinson; Jaime K Brown; James M Gold
Journal:  Schizophr Res       Date:  2012-09-08       Impact factor: 4.939

7.  Random generation and the executive control of working memory.

Authors:  A Baddeley; H Emslie; J Kolodny; J Duncan
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol A       Date:  1998-11

Review 8.  Inhibition and impulsivity: behavioral and neural basis of response control.

Authors:  Andrea Bari; Trevor W Robbins
Journal:  Prog Neurobiol       Date:  2013-07-13       Impact factor: 11.685

9.  Hot or not: response inhibition reduces the hedonic value and motivational incentive of sexual stimuli.

Authors:  Anne E Ferrey; Alexandra Frischen; Mark J Fenske
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2012-12-26

10.  Response inhibition is linked to emotional devaluation: behavioural and electrophysiological evidence.

Authors:  Monika Kiss; Jane E Raymond; Nikki Westoby; Anna C Nobre; Martin Eimer
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2008-10-03       Impact factor: 3.169

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.