Fearful Object Seeing

Carvalho, Felipe Nogueira de

doi:10.1007/s13164-021-00549-2

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Overall, the results of the present study challenge the notion that feelings of threat reduce visually perceived distance to the feared objects. It has been argued that such a bias of the perceptual system may facilitate adaptive responses in dangerous situations (e.g., faster fight/flight response; Balcetis & Cole, 2014; Cole et al, 2013; de Carvalho, 2022). Notably, the studies supporting this claim were mostly based on verbal estimations of the distance (e.g., in inches) to threatening objects (such as a living tarantula; Cole et al, 2013; a person described as aggressive; Cole et al, 2013; or a pain-triggering button; Tabor et al, 2015), which constitutes a difference to our experiment.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Threatening animals are also perceived as approaching more quickly than non-threatening ones (Basanovic et al, 2019; Vagnoni et al, 2012; Witt & Sugovic, 2013). These kinds of amplification of threat perception are believed to facilitate faster responses in the face of danger (Balcetis & Cole, 2014; de Carvalho, 2022). To the best of our knowledge, no studies have yet examined whether this proximity bias for threats is linked to cardiovascular fluctuations and, more generally, whether these fluctuations can affect the spatial representation of threatening objects.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

No cardiac phase bias for threat perception under naturalistic conditions in immersive virtual reality

Klotzsche,

Motyka,

Molak

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous studies have found that threatening stimuli are more readily perceived and more intensely experienced when presented during cardiac systole compared to diastole. Also, threatening stimuli are judged as physically closer than neutral ones. In a pre-registered study, we tested these effects and their interaction using a naturalistic (interactive, 3D) experimental design in immersive virtual reality: We briefly displayed threatening and non-threatening animals (four each) at varying distances (1.5–5.5 meters) to a group of young, healthy participants (n = 41), while recording their ECGs (electrocardiograms). Participants then pointed to the location where they had seen the animal (ca. 29k trials in total). Our pre-registered analyses indicated that perceived distances to both threatening and non-threatening animals did not differ significantly between cardiac phases – with Bayesian analysis supporting the null hypothesis. There was also no evidence for an association between subjective fear and perceived proximity to threatening animals. These results contrast with previous findings that used verbal or declarative distance measures in less naturalistic experimental conditions. Furthermore, our findings suggest that the cardiac phase-related variation in threat processing may not generalize across different paradigms and may be less relevant in naturalistic scenarios than under more abstract experimental conditions.Impact statementTo our knowledge, this is the first study to assess the influence of interoceptive cardiac signals on visual perception using naturalistic stimuli in immersive virtual reality. We based the design of our experiment on previous reports about threat processing biases and the role of the cardiac cycle but did not observe the expected effects. This poses the question of their generalizability from abstract settings to more naturalistic setups, featuring greater behavioral engagement and a richer sensory environment.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

No cardiac phase bias for threat perception under naturalistic conditions in immersive virtual reality

Klotzsche,

Motyka,

Molak

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the theoretical contours of distorted perception have recently been called into question (de Carvalho, 2022;Firestone, 2013;Firestone & Scholl, 2014) and alternative explanations to an exclusive effect of motivated perception have been proposed. Firestone in particular has argued that the visual distortion effects observed may be due more to "nonperceptual" biases than to what he has termed a "paternalistic" conception of vision consisting of helping individuals in the pursuit of adaptive tasks and behaviors.…”

Section: Motivation and Perceptual Distortionmentioning

confidence: 99%

When feeling is for seeing: comparing the effects of motivated perception between fear and anger on ambiguous threatening stimuli

Graton,

Fezzi,

Le Jeune

2023

Psychological Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The data and material (pictures) are available on the following link : https://osf.io/tr24h/ that will be included in the final version of the article. This research was not pre-registered. Funding declaration This research has not received any funding Author contributionAurélien GRATON conceived the study, developed the theory, verified the analytical method and statistics, conducted the second study and wrote the article. Noémie LE JEUNE and Hélène FEZZI fabricated the material, conducted the first study and did preliminary statistics.

show abstract

No cardiac phase bias for threat-related distance perception under naturalistic conditions in immersive virtual reality

Klotzsche,

Motyka,

Molak

et al. 2024

R. Soc. Open Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous studies have found that threatening stimuli are more readily perceived and more intensely experienced when presented during cardiac systole compared with diastole. Also, threatening stimuli are judged as physically closer than neutral ones. In a pre-registered study, we tested these effects and their interaction using a naturalistic (interactive and three-dimensional) experimental design in immersive virtual reality: we briefly displayed threatening and non-threatening animals (four each) at varying distances (1.5–5.5 m) to a group of young, healthy participants ( n = 41) while recording their electrocardiograms (ECGs). Participants then pointed to the location where they had seen the animal (approx. 29 000 trials in total). Our pre-registered analyses indicated that perceived distances to both threatening and non-threatening animals did not differ significantly between cardiac phases—with Bayesian analysis supporting the null hypothesis. There was also no evidence for an association between subjective fear and perceived proximity to threatening animals. These results contrast with previous findings that used verbal or declarative distance measures in less naturalistic experimental conditions. Furthermore, our findings suggest that the cardiac phase-related variation in threat processing may not generalize across different paradigms and may be less relevant in naturalistic scenarios than under more abstract experimental conditions.

show abstract

Fearful Object Seeing

Cited by 3 publications

References 30 publications

No cardiac phase bias for threat perception under naturalistic conditions in immersive virtual reality

No cardiac phase bias for threat perception under naturalistic conditions in immersive virtual reality

When feeling is for seeing: comparing the effects of motivated perception between fear and anger on ambiguous threatening stimuli

No cardiac phase bias for threat-related distance perception under naturalistic conditions in immersive virtual reality

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About