Effects of affective valence on a mixed Spatial Correspondence Task: A reply to Proctor (2013).

Abstract

The present study investigated the influence of emotional valence on the spatial stimulus-key location correspondence effect in three experiments using the Affective Spatial Correspondence task (AffSCt). We initially reanalyzed the results of Conde et al. (2011) according to the model proposed by Proctor (2013). In that study, compatible and incompatible responses were chosen according to the participants' team preference. In one block, the volunteers had to press a key on the same side for the Favorite team and on the opposite side for the Rival team. In another block, a reverse code was used. We found that responses were faster for the Favorite-compatible/Rival-incompatible condition (614 ms) compared with the Favorite-incompatible/ Rival-compatible condition (691 ms). The same experimental arrangement was replicated in another Brazilian city, and similar results were found. Additionally, we employed non-affective "fake" soccer teams as a control condition, and no mappingrule effect was observed. Finally, a final experiment that used the same design but different non-affective stimuli (yellow and blue bars) was performed to provide further evidence that the valence effect in the present experimental paradigm only occurs with affective stimuli. As expected, non-affective stimuli did not produce an overall advantage for any mapping rules, corroborating earlier findings with similar mixed designs. The results confirmed the previous findings and validity of the AffSCt as a methodology to investigate the effects of emotional valence on stimulus-response correspondence. However, we are unable to provide a conclusive explanation to support the several hypotheses proposed previously in our paper and by Proctor (2013).

Flowers and spiders in spatial stimulus-response compatibility: does affective valence influence selection of task-sets or selection of responses?

“…The present results are consistent with Conde et al's (2011) finding as well as reinterpretation of the finding (also see Conde et al, 2014). When analysed in terms of stimulus valence, there was a standard SRC effect for positive stimuli, but the effect was reversed for negative stimuli.…”

“…Therefore, positive stimuli facilitated retrieval of compatible mapping, whereas negative stimuli facilitated retrieval of incompatible mapping. Although Conde et al (2014) have already agreed with this interpretation, the present experiment provides the first empirical evidence that directly supported the interpretation.…”

“…Affective valence also influences the ability to regulate cognitive processes (Botvinick, Cohen, & Carter, 2004;van Steenbergen, Band, & Hommel, 2010). Of most relevance to the present study, stimulus valence has been claimed to reverse a robust psychological phenomenon, the spatial stimulus-response compatibility (SRC) effect that emerges from spatial correspondence between stimuli and responses (Conde et al, 2011(Conde et al, , 2014.…”

“…In studies of Conde et al (2011Conde et al ( , 2014, Brazilian university students rated four soccer teams for their preferences and then performed a spatial compatibility task. Stimuli in the latter task were soccer players who wore the uniform of the participant's favourite team or that of the rival team.…”

Affective Spatial Compatibility Task (AffSCt): Theory and applications

“…He showed that, when Favorite stimuli signaled compatible and Rival the incompatible mapping-rule, the MRTs are shorter than in the opposite situation. Conde et al (2014) replicated these results and showed that the emotional effect vanished when neutral soccer stimuli (fake soccer team) were used. The results described in the current paper showed different patterns of temporal distribution for each affective valence (favorite and rival stimuli), even sharing the fact that compatible and incompatible practices were made in different blocks of trials.…”