Literature DB >> 30663061

Attention to a threat-related feature does not interfere with concurrent attentive feature selection.

Maeve R Boylan1, Mia N Kelly1, Nina N Thigpen1, Andreas Keil1.   

Abstract

Visual features associated with a task and those that predict noxious events both prompt selectively heightened visuocortical responses. Conflicting views exist regarding how the competition between a task-related and a threat-related feature is resolved when they co-occur in time and space. Utilizing aversive classical Pavlovian conditioning, we investigated the visuocortical representation of two simultaneously presented, fully overlapping visual stimuli. Isoluminant red and green random dot kinematogram (RDK) stimuli were flickered at distinct tagging frequencies (8.57 Hz, 12 Hz) to elicit distinguishable steady-state visual evoked potentials (ssVEPs). Occasional coherent motion events prompted a motor response (task) or predicted a noxious noise (threat). These events occurred either in the green (task cue), the red (threat cue), or in both RDKs simultaneously. In the initial habituation phase, participants responded to coherent motion of the green RDK with a key press, but no loud noise was presented at any time. Here, selective amplification was seen for the task-relevant (green) RDK, and interference was observed when both RDKs simultaneously showed coherent motion. Upon pairing the threat cue with the noxious noise in the subsequent acquisition phase, the threat cue-evoked ssVEP (red RDK) was also amplified, but this amplification did not interact with amplification of the task cue or alter the behavioral or visuocortical interference effect observed during simultaneous coherent motion. Although competing feature conjunctions resulted in interference in the visual cortex, the acquisition of a bias toward an individual threat-related feature did not result in additional cost effects.
© 2019 Society for Psychophysiological Research.

Entities:  

Keywords:  EEG; competition; human visual cortex; ssVEP; threat cues

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30663061      PMCID: PMC6508976          DOI: 10.1111/psyp.13332

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychophysiology        ISSN: 0048-5772            Impact factor:   4.016


  36 in total

1.  The processing of emotional facial expression is gated by spatial attention: evidence from event-related brain potentials.

Authors:  Amanda Holmes; Patrik Vuilleumier; Martin Eimer
Journal:  Brain Res Cogn Brain Res       Date:  2003-04

2.  Brain Activity and Network Interactions Linked to Valence-Related Differences in the Impact of Emotional Distraction.

Authors:  A D Iordan; F Dolcos
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2017-01-01       Impact factor: 5.357

3.  Arousal-Biased Competition in Perception and Memory.

Authors:  Mara Mather; Matthew R Sutherland
Journal:  Perspect Psychol Sci       Date:  2011-03

Review 4.  The steady-state visual evoked potential in vision research: A review.

Authors:  Anthony M Norcia; L Gregory Appelbaum; Justin M Ales; Benoit R Cottereau; Bruno Rossion
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 2.240

5.  Signals of threat do not capture, but prioritize, attention: a conditioning approach.

Authors:  Lies Notebaert; Geert Crombez; Stefaan Van Damme; Jan De Houwer; Jan Theeuwes
Journal:  Emotion       Date:  2011-02

Review 6.  Emotion processing and the amygdala: from a 'low road' to 'many roads' of evaluating biological significance.

Authors:  Luiz Pessoa; Ralph Adolphs
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurosci       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 34.870

7.  The effect of single-session interpretation modification on attention bias in socially anxious individuals.

Authors:  Nader Amir; Jessica Bomyea; Courtney Beard
Journal:  J Anxiety Disord       Date:  2009-10-27

Review 8.  Neural mechanisms underlying selective attention to threat.

Authors:  Sonia J Bishop
Journal:  Ann N Y Acad Sci       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 5.691

9.  Not what you expect: experience but not expectancy predicts conditioned responses in human visual and supplementary cortex.

Authors:  Stephan Moratti; Andreas Keil
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2009-03-20       Impact factor: 5.357

10.  Behavioral and ERP measures of attentional bias to threat in the dot-probe task: poor reliability and lack of correlation with anxiety.

Authors:  Emily S Kappenman; Jaclyn L Farrens; Steven J Luck; Greg Hajcak Proudfit
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2014-12-04
View more
  3 in total

1.  Attentional bias during emotional processing: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence from an Emotional Flanker Task.

Authors:  Natalia Trujillo; Diana Gómez; Sandra Trujillo; José David López; Agustín Ibáñez; Mario A Parra
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-04-02       Impact factor: 3.240

2.  Social aversive generalization learning sharpens the tuning of visuocortical neurons to facial identity cues.

Authors:  Yannik Stegmann; Lea Ahrens; Paul Pauli; Andreas Keil; Matthias J Wieser
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2020-06-09       Impact factor: 8.140

3.  Associative learning shapes visual discrimination in a web-based classical conditioning task.

Authors:  Yannik Stegmann; Marta Andreatta; Paul Pauli; Matthias J Wieser
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-08-03       Impact factor: 4.379

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.