Biases in eye movements to threatening facial expressions in generalized anxiety disorder and depressive disorder.

Mogg, Karin; Millar, Neil; Bradley, Brendan P.

doi:10.1037/0021-843x.109.4.695

Cited by 382 publications

(330 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

303

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In particular, there is inconsistent evidence for rapid engagement or delayed disengagement of overt attention (e.g., foveal vision) from threat. Findings of rapid engagement with threat have typically been observed in freeviewing tasks or RT tasks with concurrent eye movement measures, which include simple visual displays containing two or four items (e.g., Garner et al, 2006;Mogg et al, 2007;Mogg et al, 2000;Stevens et al, 2011). These findings have not typically been replicated in studies using more complex visual displays (e.g., Derakshan & Koster, 2010;Huijding et al, 2011).…”

Section: Theoretical Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the function of selective attention and hypervigilance for threat in anxiety

Richards

Benson

Donnelly

et al. 2014

Clinical Psychology Review

169

111

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Theoretical Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the function of selective attention and hypervigilance for threat in anxiety

Richards

Benson

Donnelly

et al. 2014

Clinical Psychology Review

169

111

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Other studies, using free viewing paradigms or forced choice tasks, measured proportion of first fixation as an index of oculomotor capture (e.g., Calvo & Lang, 2004;Calvo, Avero, & Lundqvist, 2006;Humphrey et al, 2012;Nummenmaa et al, 2006). Only a few studies reported faster saccades to threatening than to nonthreatening stimuli (Bannerman, Milders, de Gelder, & Sahraie, 2009;LoBue et al, 2014;Reynolds, Eastwood, Partanen, Frischen, & Smilek, 2009; but see Calvo et al, 2006;Derakshan & Koster, 2010;Mogg, Millar, & Bradley, 2000), suggesting faster processing of threatening stimuli. However, in these studies the threatening stimulus was always task relevant.…”

Section: Oculomotor Capturementioning

confidence: 99%

Distracted by danger: Temporal and spatial dynamics of visual selection in the presence of threat

Mulckhuyse

Dalmaijer

2015

Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Threatening stimuli are known to influence attentional and visual processes in order to prioritize selection. For example, previous research showed faster detection of threatening relative to nonthreatening stimuli. This has led to the proposal that threatening stimuli are prioritized automatically via a rapid subcortical route. However, in most studies, the threatening stimulus is always to some extent task relevant. Therefore, it is still unclear if threatening stimuli are automatically prioritized by the visual system. We used the additional singleton paradigm with task-irrelevant fear-conditioned distractors (CS+ and CS-) and indexed the time course of eye movement behavior. The results demonstrate automatic prioritization of threat. First, mean latency of saccades directed to the neutral target was increased in the presence of a threatening (CS+) relative to a nonthreatening distractor (CS-), indicating exogenous attentional capture and delayed disengagement of covert attention. Second, more error saccades were directed to the threatening than to the nonthreatening distractor, indicating a modulation of automatically driven saccades. Nevertheless, cumulative distributions of the saccade latencies showed no modulation of threat for the fastest goal-driven saccades, and threat did not affect the latency of the error saccades to the distractors. Together these results suggest that threatening stimuli are automatically prioritized in attentional and visual selection but not via faster processing. Rather, we suggest that prioritization results from an enhanced representation of the threatening stimulus in the oculomotor system, which drives attentional and visual selection. The current findings are interpreted in terms of a neurobiological model of saccade programming.

show abstract

“…Previous studies on gaze behavior during face processing consist on the one hand of clinical studies (e.g., Cutting, 1990;Manor et al, 1999;Mertens, Siegmund, & Grüsser, 1993;Mogg, Millar, & Bradley, 2000;Shimizu et al, 2000) and on the other hand of studies that investigated gaze behavior and face processing in healthy populations. We will focus on the latter.…”

Section: Research On Gaze Behavior During Face Processingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gaze behavior in analytical and holistic face processing

2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Humans are experts at recognizing faces. We identify faces quickly and exactly without any effort. Small wonder, then, that extensive research has been carried out to understand the stages of information processing that underlie face-recognition performance. The two relevant stages of information processing are perceptual encoding and information processing. In the area of face processing, most studies have focused on the latter and have shown that people often use the configural processing mode-processing the relations among the facial features (e.g., Diamond & Carey, 1986;Farah, Tanaka, & Drain, 1995;Farah, Wilson, Drain, & Tanaka, 1998;Freire, Lee, & Symons, 2000;Tanaka & Farah, 1993). Analytical face processing has been emphasized as being relevant, too (e.g., Bruyer & Coget, 1987;Macho & Leder, 1998;Schwarzer & Massaro, 2001), and most recent studies concern the question of whether and how both configural and analytical information processing play a role in face recognition (e.g., Collishaw & Hole, 2000;Leder & Bruce, 2000;Schwaninger, Lobmaier, & Collishaw, 2002;Searcy & Bartlett, 1996;Tanaka & Sengco, 1997). However, very few studies address the visual encoding stage in face processing directly and analyze what kind of facial information is extracted during face processing. According to Viviani (1990), the analysis of gaze behavior can be understood as a method to study the stage of visual encoding. Therefore, to understand the visual encoding stage of face processing, the present study investigated participants' gaze behavior when they processed faces analytically or configurally. Research on the Different Modes of Face ProcessingAs mentioned above, the information processing modes people use to recognize faces is of both configural and analytical character. According to Maurer, Le Grand, and Mondloch (2002), configural processing can be divided into three types: (1) processing of first-order relationsthat is, seeing that a stimulus is a face because the features are arranged with two eyes above a nose, which is above a mouth; (2) holistic processing-that is, gluing together the features into a gestalt; and (3) processing second-order relations-that is, processing the specific distances among the features. Previous research has shown that adults use all of these three types of configural processing: They have a remarkable ability to detect faces among a sample of other visual stimuli on the basis of first-order relations (Moscovitch, Winocur, & Behrmann, 1997). When adults detect the first-order relations of a face, they tend to process the face as a gestalt (holistic processing), which makes it harder to process individual features. This effect was demonstrated by the "composite face effect" (e.g., Young, Hellaway, & Hay, 1987), in which the top half of a face can be recognized correctly when it is presented in isolation, but that recognition is significantly slower when the top half is combined with the bottom half of a different face. Holistic processing of faces has also been demonstrated by the "par...

show abstract

Biases in eye movements to threatening facial expressions in generalized anxiety disorder and depressive disorder.

Cited by 382 publications

References 46 publications

Exploring the function of selective attention and hypervigilance for threat in anxiety

Exploring the function of selective attention and hypervigilance for threat in anxiety

Distracted by danger: Temporal and spatial dynamics of visual selection in the presence of threat

Gaze behavior in analytical and holistic face processing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About