Modelling distractor devaluation (DD) and its neurophysiological correlates

Fragopanagos, N.; Cristescu, Tamara; Goolsby, Brian A.; Kiss, Mónika; Eimer, Martin; Nobre, Anna C.; Raymond, Jane E.; Shapiro, Kimron L.; Taylor, John G.

doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2008.09.018

Cited by 19 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 61 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, the vACC, in conjunction with the amygdala and OFC, may affectively evaluate the conflict signals triggered by the dACC either directly, or indirectly via inhibitory signals generated by a frontal-parietal attention network that biases perceptual processing and response selection in favor of target stimuli against distractors (Bunge, Ochsner, Desmond, Glover & Gabrieli, 2001;Kastner & Ungerleider, 2000;Kerns et al, 2004;Milham, Banich, Claus, & Cohen, 2003). Indeed, a recent neural network model supports the role of the OFC and amygdala in encoding the affective value of stimuli in response to attentional signals from prefrontal areas (Fragopanagos et al, 2009). Thus, the stronger the conflict signals generated by dACC (and the stronger the concomitant inhibition), the greater would be the negative affective response generated by vACC, amygdala, and OFC.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The affective consequences of cognitive inhibition: Devaluation or neutralization?

Frischen

Ferrey

Burt

et al. 2012

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Affective evaluations of previously ignored visual stimuli are more negative than those of novel items or prior targets of attention or response. This has been taken as evidence that inhibition has negative affective consequences. But inhibition could act instead to attenuate or "neutralize" preexisting affective salience, predicting opposite effects for stimuli that were initially positive or negative in valence. We tested this hypothesis by presenting trustworthy and untrustworthy faces (Experiment 1), strongly positive and negative photographs (Experiment 2), and monetary gain- and loss-associated patterns (Experiment 3) in a Go/No-Go task and assessing subsequent affective ratings. Evaluations of prior No-Go (inhibited) stimuli were more negative than of prior Go (noninhibited) stimuli, regardless of a priori affective valence. Ratings of No-Go stimuli also became increasingly negative (vs. increasingly neutral) when preexisting salience was increased via stimulus repetition (Experiment 4). Our results suggest inhibition leads to affective devaluation, not affective neutralization.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The affective consequences of cognitive inhibition: Devaluation or neutralization?

Frischen

Ferrey

Burt

et al. 2012

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The current behavioral results might be explained by the distractor devaluation (DD) model which regarded that attentional inhibition processing on the distractors would affect the affective evaluation on the target [17], and positive distractors might attract more attention source and lead to harder inhibition control processing on them, therefore, it took participants longer time to evaluate the neutral target expression when they were flanked by happy distractors [5,6]. The current behavioral findings did not completely replicate Fenske & Eastwood’s study [5], and some flanker effects diminished in our current study, which might be due to that real human faces, compared with simple cartoon faces, drew more attention and left fewer attention resources for further conflict control processing.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neural Correlates of Conflict Control on Facial Expressions with A Flanker Paradigm

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conflict control is an important cognitive control ability and it is also crucial for human beings to execute conflict control on affective information. To address the neural correlates of cognitive control on affective conflicts, the present study recorded event-related potentials (ERPs) during a revised Eriksen Flanker Task. Participants were required to indicate the valence of the central target expression while ignoring the flanker expressions in the affective congruent condition, affective incongruent condition and neutral condition (target expressions flanked by scramble blocks). Behavioral results manifested that participants exhibited faster response speed in identifying neutral target face when it was flanked by neutral distractors than by happy distractors. Electrophysiological results showed that happy target expression induced larger N2 amplitude when flanked by sad distractors than by happy distractors and scramble blocks during the conflict monitoring processing. During the attentional control processing, happy target expression induced faster P3 response when it was flanked by happy distractors than by sad distractors, and sad target expression evoked larger P3 amplitude when it was flanked by happy distractors comparing with sad distractors. Taken together, the current findings of temporal dynamic of brain activity during cognitive control on affective conflicts shed light on the essential relationship between cognitive control and affective information processing.

show abstract

“…However, if other tasks are present, the viewer of the movie or television programme may see the embedded brands as some form of distractor. A stream of research on distractor devaluation suggests that if a stimulus distracts from the actual target, this leads to a negative attitudinal effect as the distracting stimulus interferes with the goals in that situation (Fenske and Raymond, 2006;Fragopanagos et al, 2009;Raymond, 2009;Raymond et al, 2003Raymond et al, , 2005Veling et al, 2007). To date, visual distraction has been researched with rather neutral, unconditioned stimuli such as unfamiliar faces or symbols that are mostly static.…”

Section: Multitasking and Attitudinal And Intentional Effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

So Many Things to Do! How Multitasking Affects Memory and Attitude for Product and Brand Placements

Gunawardena

Waiguny

2014

Australasian Marketing Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The majority of current product placement research is predicated on a cinema setting and assumes a rather captive audience. Little is known, about the effect of audience multitasking on product placements. As multitasking activity is most prevalent in the home, an understanding of this activity is critical to developing product placement techniques. This initial study investigates the effects of multitasking on both subtle and prominent product placements. The results indicate that less familiar, prominently placed brands suffer from significantly less recall and valuation within multitasking situations. Product placement within a multitasking situation serves to devalue the placed brand, as the placement is perceived as a distraction from other tasks being performed.

show abstract

Modelling distractor devaluation (DD) and its neurophysiological correlates

Cited by 19 publications

References 61 publications

The affective consequences of cognitive inhibition: Devaluation or neutralization?

The affective consequences of cognitive inhibition: Devaluation or neutralization?

Neural Correlates of Conflict Control on Facial Expressions with A Flanker Paradigm

So Many Things to Do! How Multitasking Affects Memory and Attitude for Product and Brand Placements

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About