Our findings support a lateralized role of left and right DLPFC activity in enhancing/worsening the top-down regulation of emotional attention processing. These results support the rationale of new therapies for affective disorders aimed to increase the activation of the left over the right DLPFC in combination with attentional control training, and identify specific target attention mechanisms to be trained.

The use of speech as a digital biomarker to detect stress levels is increasingly gaining attention. Yet, heterogeneous effects of stress on specific acoustic speech features have been observed, possibly due to previous studies’ use of different stress labels/categories and the lack of solid stress induction paradigms or validation of experienced stress. Here, we deployed a controlled, within-subject psychosocial stress induction experiment in which participants received both neutral (control condition) and negative (negative condition) comparative feedback after solving a challenging cognitive task. This study is the first to use a (non-actor) within-participant design that verifies a successful stress induction using both self-report (i.e., decreased reported valence) and physiological measures (i.e., increased heart rate acceleration using event-related cardiac responses during feedback exposure). Analyses of acoustic speech features showed a significant increase in Fundamental Frequency (F0) and Harmonics-to-Noise Ratio (HNR), and a significant decrease in shimmer during the negative feedback condition. Our results using read-out-loud speech comply with earlier research, yet we are the first to validate these results in a well-controlled but ecologically-valid setting to guarantee the generalization of our findings to real-life settings. Further research should aim to replicate these results in a free speech setting to test the robustness of our findings for real-world settings and should include semantics to also take into account what you say and not only how you say it.

Abstract The left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (lDLPFC) is implicated in anticipatory (i.e. during anticipation of emotional stimuli) and online (i.e. during confrontation with emotional stimuli) emotion regulatory processes. However, research that investigates the causal role of the lDLPFC in these processes is lacking. In this study, 74 participants received active or sham transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the lDLPFC. Participants were told strangers evaluated them. These (rigged) social evaluations were presented, and in 50% of the trials, participants could anticipate the valence (positive or negative) of the upcoming social feedback. Pupil dilation (a marker of cognitive resource allocation) and skin conductance responses (a marker of arousal) were measured. The results indicate that active (compared to sham) tDCS reduced arousal during the confrontation with anticipated feedback but only marginally during the confrontation with unanticipated feedback. When participants were given the opportunity to anticipate the social feedback, tDCS reduced arousal, irrespective of whether one was anticipating or being confronted with the anticipated feedback. Moreover, tDCS reduced cognitive resource allocation during anticipation, which was associated with resource allocation increases during the subsequent confrontation. Altogether, results suggest that the lDLPFC is causally implicated in the interplay between anticipatory and online emotion regulatory processes.

Background and objectives The Dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) is implicated in cognitive and emotional responses. Yet, research that investigates the causal role of the left versus right DLPFC during the processes of emotion appraisal is lacking. In the current study, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) was used to disentangle the functional lateralization of the DLPFC on emotional processing in response to the anticipation of, and subsequent confrontation with emotional stimuli in healthy volunteers. Methods Forty-eight subjects received both active and sham (on separate days) anodal tDCS over either the left (N = 24) or right (N = 24) DLPFC. Subjects’ pupil dilation (PD, a physiological marker of cognitive resource allocation) was recorded while performing an appraisal task in which negative and positive emotion eliciting images were presented, each preceded by an informative cue indicating the valence of the upcoming stimulus. Results As compared to sham stimulation, left DLPFC anodal tDCS resulted in increased PD when confronted with negative emotional images, whereas right DLPFC anodal tDCS resulted in decreased PD when confronted with emotional images, irrespective of valence. Limitations The interpretation of pupil dilation in response to emotional stimuli is limited. Conclusion These findings suggest inverse lateralized DLPFC effects on cognitive resource allocation (as measured by pupillary responses) when confronted with emotional stimuli. The current findings may shed some light on mechanisms that explain the antidepressant effects of non-invasive brain stimulation of the left DLPFC.

Abstract Previous research supports the distinction between proactive and reactive control. Although the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) has been consistently related to these processes, lateralization of proactive and reactive control is still under debate. We manipulated brain activity to investigate the role of the left and right DLPFC in proactive and reactive cognitive control. Using a single-blind, sham-controlled crossover within-subjects design, 25 young healthy females performed the ‘AX’ Continuous Performance Task after receiving sham versus active High-Frequency repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (HF-rTMS) to increase left and right DLPFC activity. RTs and pupillometry were used to assess patterns of proactive and reactive cognitive control and task-related resource allocation respectively. We observed that, compared to sham, HF-rTMS over the left DLPFC increased proactive control. After right DLPFC HF-rTMS, participants showed slower RTs on AX trials, suggesting more reactive control. However, this latter result was not supported by RTs on BX trials (i.e. the trial that specifically assess reactive control). Pupil measures showed a sustained increase in resource allocation after both active left and right HF-rTMS. Our results with RT data provide evidence on the role of the left DLPFC in proactive control and suggest that the right DLPFC is implicated in reactive control.