Literature DB >> 31367982

Now you feel it, now you don't: Motivated attention to emotional content is modulated by age and task demands.

Didem Pehlivanoglu1,2, Paul Verhaeghen3.   

Abstract

Several studies with younger adults have examined the degree to which emotion captures attention using the event-related potentials (ERP) technique, but it is unknown whether there are age-related differences on this issue. We examined ERP correlates of age-related differences in processing of task-relevant and task-irrelevant emotional material. Participants viewed emotional or neutral images, presented at fixation, flanked by two bars of either differing or matching orientation. In one set of trials, participants decided whether the pictures were presented in black-and-white or color; in another set of trials, they made a match/judgment on the flanking bars. Before the experiment proper, we determined each individual's threshold for line orientation (in the presence of neutral pictures at fixation); mismatch bar stimuli were constructed using this threshold, thus equating baseline performance on the bar tasks across individuals. When attention was focused on the images, ERPs provided evidence for emotion-based processing in the younger group, regardless of valence; older adults showed more differentiated valence-based processing as reflected by a positivity effect (in line with socioemotional selectivity theory). When the images were task-irrelevant, older adults showed no evidence of emotional processing whatsoever; younger adults showed a pattern of suppression in the form of reduced processing of emotional material relative to neutral images. These findings suggest that, once performance on a neutral baseline task is equated, older adults do not exhibit a specific age-related deficit in inhibiting emotional material; they also suggest qualitative differences in processing of to-be-ignored emotional material in younger and older adults.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Aging; Event-related potentials; Inhibitory deficit hypothesis; Load theory; Positivity bias; Selective attention; Socioemotional selectivity theory

Year:  2019        PMID: 31367982     DOI: 10.3758/s13415-019-00741-z

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


  55 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.  Nonemotional features suppress early and enhance late emotional electrocortical responses to negative pictures.

Authors:  Stefan Wiens; Anders Sand; Jonas K Olofsson
Journal:  Biol Psychol       Date:  2010-11-18       Impact factor: 3.251

3.  Top-down enhancement and suppression of the magnitude and speed of neural activity.

Authors:  Adam Gazzaley; Jeffrey W Cooney; Kevin McEvoy; Robert T Knight; Mark D'Esposito
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 3.225

4.  Temporal course of emotional negativity bias: an ERP study.

Authors:  Yu-Xia Huang; Yue-Jia Luo
Journal:  Neurosci Lett       Date:  2006-01-30       Impact factor: 3.046

Review 5.  Emotion and attention: event-related brain potential studies.

Authors:  Harald T Schupp; Tobias Flaisch; Jessica Stockburger; Markus Junghöfer
Journal:  Prog Brain Res       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 2.453

6.  The role of spatial attention in the processing of facial expression: an ERP study of rapid brain responses to six basic emotions.

Authors:  Martin Eimer; Amanda Holmes; Francis P McGlone
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 3.282

7.  IFCN standards for digital recording of clinical EEG. International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology.

Authors:  M R Nuwer; G Comi; R Emerson; A Fuglsang-Frederiksen; J M Guérit; H Hinrichs; A Ikeda; F J Luccas; P Rappelsburger
Journal:  Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  1998-03

8.  Beyond good and evil: the time-course of neural activity elicited by specific picture content.

Authors:  Anna Weinberg; Greg Hajcak
Journal:  Emotion       Date:  2010-12

9.  Resolving Age-Related Differences in Working Memory: Equating Perception and Attention Makes Older Adults Remember as Well as Younger Adults.

Authors:  Paul Verhaeghen; Shriradha Geigerman; Haoxiang Yang; Alejandra C Montoya; Dobromir Rahnev
Journal:  Exp Aging Res       Date:  2019-03-08       Impact factor: 1.645

10.  Perceptual load as a necessary condition for selective attention.

Authors:  N Lavie
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1995-06       Impact factor: 3.332

View more
  6 in total

1.  Multiple identity tracking strategies vary by age: An ERP study.

Authors:  Didem Pehlivanoglu; Audrey Duarte; Paul Verhaeghen
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2020-01-23       Impact factor: 3.139

2.  Age-Related Differences in Amygdala Activation Associated With Face Trustworthiness but No Evidence of Oxytocin Modulation.

Authors:  Tian Lin; Didem Pehlivanoglu; Maryam Ziaei; Peiwei Liu; Adam J Woods; David Feifel; Håkan Fischer; Natalie C Ebner
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2022-06-23

3.  Tri-Phasic Model ofOxytocin (TRIO): A systematic conceptual review of oxytocin-related ERP research.

Authors:  Didem Pehlivanoglu; Elisha Myers; Natalie C Ebner
Journal:  Biol Psychol       Date:  2020-06-05       Impact factor: 3.251

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.  An ERP investigation of age differences in the negativity bias for self-relevant and non-self-relevant stimuli.

Authors:  Eric C Fields; Holly J Bowen; Ryan T Daley; Katelyn R Parisi; Angela Gutchess; Elizabeth A Kensinger
Journal:  Neurobiol Aging       Date:  2021-02-20       Impact factor: 5.133

6.  Widowhood Impairs Emotional Cognition Among Elderly.

Authors:  Taiyong Bi; Hui Kou; Yanshu Kong; Boyao Shao
Journal:  Front Aging Neurosci       Date:  2022-01-31       Impact factor: 5.750

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.