Neurophysiological processes and functional neuroanatomical structures underlying proactive effects of emotional conflicts

Schreiter, Marie Luise; Chmielewski, Witold X.; Beste, Christian

doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2018.03.017

Cited by 17 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 59 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In that study, an adverse effect of negative emotion processing on response inhibition was only observed when inhibitory demands co-occurred with high working memory demands. Similar effects were recently shown for performance in an emotional conflict task (Schreiter, Chmielewski, & Beste, 2018).…”

Section: The Dual Competition Frameworksupporting

confidence: 86%

Perceived threat modulates inhibitory performance.

Sebastian¹,

Schick²,

Sandner³

et al. 2021

Emotion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Highly arousing, affective stimuli have adverse effects on cognition and performance. Perception of affective stimuli is, however, highly subjective and may impact on the interaction of emotion and cognition. Here, we tested the impact of high- versus low-threatening stimuli on response inhibition as a function of perceived threat intensity. Response inhibition was probed using a stop-signal paradigm in 62 healthy adults. We used stop-signals that had previously been paired with an unpleasant electrodermal stimulation (i.e., high-threat stimuli) or that had never been paired with electrodermal stimulation (i.e., low-threat stimuli). High-threat stimuli did not affect stopping performance in general. Only participants who perceived the high-threat stimuli as highly painful showed impaired response inhibition on high-threat trials relative to low-threat trials. Participants who perceived the high-threat as mildly painful, however, showed improved response inhibition on high-threat trials. This effect was not moderated by the current anxious state. This suggests that the impact of negative affective stimuli on cognition critically depends on subjective threat perception. Ratings of affective stimuli should be included in studies probing the emotion–cognition interaction because subjective perception might strongly impact on that interaction.

show abstract

Section: The Dual Competition Frameworksupporting

confidence: 86%

Perceived threat modulates inhibitory performance.

Sebastian¹,

Schick²,

Sandner³

et al. 2021

Emotion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, only specific subprocesses during the resolution of perceptual-attentional conflicts are modulated by MPH. Although, RIDE was developed to account for intraindividual variability in EEG data (Ouyang et al, 2011;Ouyang et al, 2015a), it can be applied to distinguish coexisting coding levels that occur during conflict monitoring Mückschel, Dippel, & Beste, 2017;Schreiter, Chmielewski, & Beste, 2018;Wolff, Mückschel, & Beste, 2017). Although, RIDE was developed to account for intraindividual variability in EEG data (Ouyang et al, 2011;Ouyang et al, 2015a), it can be applied to distinguish coexisting coding levels that occur during conflict monitoring Mückschel, Dippel, & Beste, 2017;Schreiter, Chmielewski, & Beste, 2018;Wolff, Mückschel, & Beste, 2017).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous work indicating very specific effects of the NE system during processes related to conflict monitoring used a specific EEG signal decomposition technique-residue iteration decomposition (RIDE) (Ouyang, Herzmann, Zhou, & Sommer, 2011;Ouyang, Sommer, & Zhou, 2015a). Although, RIDE was developed to account for intraindividual variability in EEG data (Ouyang et al, 2011;Ouyang et al, 2015a), it can be applied to distinguish coexisting coding levels that occur during conflict monitoring Mückschel, Dippel, & Beste, 2017;Schreiter, Chmielewski, & Beste, 2018;Wolff, Mückschel, & Beste, 2017). RIDE decomposes the EEG signal in three clusters (Ouyang et al, 2011;Ouyang et al, 2015a): The S-cluster refers to stimulus-related processes (e.g., sensory encoding, sensory attention, and perception), the R-cluster refers to response-related processes (e.g., motor execution) and the C-cluster refers to intermediate processes between S and R (e.g., top-down attentional control and response selection).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Notably, the C-cluster is also crucial to consider regarding MPH effects of perceptual-attentional conflicts: The reason is that stimulus-response translation processes reflected by the C-cluster have been shown to be modulated during conflict resolution processes (Bluschke, Chmielewski, Mückschel, Roessner, & Beste, 2017;Schreiter et al, 2018). Furthermore, the dopamine system (Li et al, 2001;Li & Sikström, 2002;Servan-Schreiber et al, 1990;Yousif et al, 2016;Ziegler et al, 2016) as well as the norepinephrine system Mückschel, Chmielewski et al, 2017) have been shown to affect task context representation, task-related decision, or response selection processes during the resolution of processing conflicts.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The system‐neurophysiological basis for how methylphenidate modulates perceptual–attentional conflicts during auditory processing

Adelhöfer

Gohil

Passow

et al. 2018

Human Brain Mapping

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ability to selectively perceive and flexibly attend to relevant sensory signals in the environment is essential for action control. Whereas neuromodulation of sensory or attentional processing is often investigated, neuromodulation of interactive effects between perception and attention, that is, high attentional control demand when the relevant sensory information is perceptually less salient than the irrelevant one, is not well understood. To fill this gap, this pharmacological-electroencephalogram (EEG) study applied an intensity-modulated, focused-attention dichotic listening paradigm together with temporal EEG signal decomposition and source localization analyses. We used a double-blind MPH/placebo crossover design to delineate the effects of methylphenidate (MPH)-a dopamine/norepinephrine transporter blocker-on the resolution of perceptual-attentional conflicts, when perceptual saliency and attentional focus favor opposing ears, in healthy young adults. We show that MPH increased behavioral performance specifically in the condition with the most pronounced conflict between perceptual saliency and attentional focus. On the neurophysiological level, MPH effects in line with the behavioral data were observed after accounting for intraindividual variability in the signal. More specifically, MPH did not show an effect on stimulus-related processes but modulated the onset latency of processes between stimulus evaluation and responding. These modulations were further shown to be associated with activation differences in the temporoparietal junction (BA40) and the superior parietal cortex (BA7) and may reflect neuronal gain modulation principles. The findings provide mechanistic insights into the role of modulated dopamine/norepinephrine transmitter systems for the interactions between perception and attention.

show abstract

“…Processes linked to stimulus perception and encoding are assumed to be reflected by the S-cluster whereas the R-cluster is associated with preparing and executing a response. Processes occurring in between including evaluating stimulus input or translating the stimulus into a specific response are assumed to be covered by the C-cluster 26,29,32,33 .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Neurophysiological correlates of perception–action binding in the somatosensory system

Friedrich

Verrel

Kleimaker

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Action control requires precisely and flexibly linking sensory input and motor output. This is true for both, visuo-motor and somatosensory-motor integration. However, while perception–action integration has been extensively investigated for the visual modality, data on how somatosensory and action-related information is associated are scarce. We use the Theory of Event Coding (TEC) as a framework to investigate perception–action integration in the somatosensory-motor domain. Based on studies examining the neural mechanisms underlying stimulus–response binding in the visuo-motor domain, the current study investigates binding mechanisms in the somatosensory-motor domain using EEG signal decomposition and source localization analyses. The present study clearly demonstrates binding between somatosensory stimulus and response features. Importantly, repetition benefits but no repetition costs are evident in the somatosensory modality, which differs from findings in the visual domain. EEG signal decomposition indicates that response selection mechanisms, rather than stimulus-related processes, account for the behavioral binding effects. This modulation is associated with activation differences in the left superior parietal cortex (BA 7), an important relay of sensorimotor integration.

show abstract

Neurophysiological processes and functional neuroanatomical structures underlying proactive effects of emotional conflicts

Cited by 17 publications

References 59 publications

Perceived threat modulates inhibitory performance.

Perceived threat modulates inhibitory performance.

The system‐neurophysiological basis for how methylphenidate modulates perceptual–attentional conflicts during auditory processing

Neurophysiological correlates of perception–action binding in the somatosensory system

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About