2018
DOI: 10.1037/emo0000342
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Caution follows fear: Evidence from hierarchical drift diffusion modelling.

Abstract: Fearful expressions are thought to warn of potential threat (Davis et al

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
11
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 66 publications
1
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Specifically, we generated a model with four parameters: a (threshold), v (drift rate), t (non-decision time), and z (starting point), with each parameter varying by the tested duration. Our choice of this model conforms to earlier work on the DDM as applied to temporal bisection data (2ı); (Tipples, 2018), as well our own work demonstrating that this model provides the best fit to bisection data (Wiener et al, 2018a). Model fitting was applied individually to each subject across all three experiments; for experiment 3, the four parameters were additionally set to vary by the starting location (Far/Close).…”
Section: Drift Diffusion Modelingmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…Specifically, we generated a model with four parameters: a (threshold), v (drift rate), t (non-decision time), and z (starting point), with each parameter varying by the tested duration. Our choice of this model conforms to earlier work on the DDM as applied to temporal bisection data (2ı); (Tipples, 2018), as well our own work demonstrating that this model provides the best fit to bisection data (Wiener et al, 2018a). Model fitting was applied individually to each subject across all three experiments; for experiment 3, the four parameters were additionally set to vary by the starting location (Far/Close).…”
Section: Drift Diffusion Modelingmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…But they can increase subjective feelings of anxiety (Blairy, Herrera, & Hess, 1999) and are perceived as more threatening and arousing than neutral or happy faces (Grillon & Charney, 2011b; Wieser & Keil, 2014). Fearful faces elicit a more cautious, inhibited behavioral response style (Tipples, 2018). They also increase vigilance for potentially threat-relevant cues, particularly for low spatial-frequency (LSF) information.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although fearful faces do not elicit robust signs of fear or anxiety 10 (e.g. potentiation of the startle reflex) and are less ecologically valid than dynamic expressions of emotion 87 , they are widely used in neuroimaging research, rated as more threatening and arousing than neutral or happy faces, and associated with increased behavioral caution 88 – 91 . Fearful faces also promote vigilance; the mere presentation of fearful faces produces persistent increases in visual sensitivity, boosts the resolution of visual processing, and enhances the efficiency of attentional search 10 .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%