Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2011 Apr 13:7:8.
doi: 10.1186/1744-9081-7-8.

Facial and semantic emotional interference: a pilot study on the behavioral and cortical responses to the Dual Valence Association Task

Affiliations

Facial and semantic emotional interference: a pilot study on the behavioral and cortical responses to the Dual Valence Association Task

Agustín Ibáñez et al. Behav Brain Funct. .

Abstract

Background: Integration of compatible or incompatible emotional valence and semantic information is an essential aspect of complex social interactions. A modified version of the Implicit Association Test (IAT) called Dual Valence Association Task (DVAT) was designed in order to measure conflict resolution processing from compatibility/incompatibly of semantic and facial valence. The DVAT involves two emotional valence evaluative tasks which elicits two forms of emotional compatible/incompatible associations (facial and semantic).

Methods: Behavioural measures and Event Related Potentials were recorded while participants performed the DVAT.

Results: Behavioural data showed a robust effect that distinguished compatible/incompatible tasks. The effects of valence and contextual association (between facial and semantic stimuli) showed early discrimination in N170 of faces. The LPP component was modulated by the compatibility of the DVAT.

Conclusions: Results suggest that DVAT is a robust paradigm for studying the emotional interference effect in the processing of simultaneous information from semantic and facial stimuli.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Sequence representation for compatible test block. A. The schema shows a face and a word sequence presentation and the participant's response. Face and word trials are alternately presented for a short time, strictly. Positive and negative faces, along with words of positive and negative valence, are present in the stimuli set and are presented in a randomized sequence. The participant is required to classify each stimulus to the left or to the right according to labels displayed on top of the screen. When a classification response error is made, negative feedback is given (i.e., in the word sequence illustrated in the figure). B. During the incompatible block test the valence classification of a face (e.g., happy-left vs. angry-right) must be classified in the opposite valence direction of the word (unpleasant-left vs. pleasant-right). When items from compatible categories (e.g. happy + pleasant) share a response key, performance is faster and more accurate than when items from incongruent categories (e.g. angry + pleasant) share a key
Figure 2
Figure 2
N170 waveform and topography. N170 component elicited by emotional words and faces. The N170 modulation is predominant in the left hemisphere for words and in the right for faces. Boxes in ERPs figures are indicative of regions where statistical comparison shown significant differences. Right side of the figure: Word and Face voltage maps averaged on 140-190 ms. Abbreviations: Word P-A (pleasant words associated to anger face); Word U-A (unpleasant words associated to anger face); Face H-P (happy faces associated to pleasant word); Face H-U (happy faces associated to unpleasant word); Face A-U (anger faces associated to unpleasant word); Face A-P (anger faces associated to pleasant word).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Frontal LPP. Selected ROIs of LPP elicited by faces and words in response to Incompatible (continuous line) and Compatible tasks (dashed line). Top: ERPs of Faces. Bottom: ERPs of Words. In agreement with the behavioral results, we found a LPP modulation related to incompatible blocks. Note the lateralization effects for word stimuli and the bilateral effects for faces.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Barrett LF, Lindquist KA, Gendron M. Language as context for the perception of emotion. Trends Cogn Sci. 2007;11:327–332. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2007.06.003. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Havas DA, Glenberg AM, Rink M. Emotion simulation during language comprehension. Psychon Bull & Rev. 2007;14:436–441. - PubMed
    1. Greenwald AG, McGhee DE, Schwartz JL. Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: the implicit association test. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1998;74:1464–1480. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.74.6.1464. - DOI - PubMed
    1. De Houwer J, Teige-Mocigemba S, Spruyt A, Moors A. Implicit measures: A normative analysis and review. Psychol Bull. 2009;135:347–368. doi: 10.1037/a0014211. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Greenwald AG, Poehlman TA, Uhlmann EL, Banaji MR. Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: III. Meta-analysis of predictive validity. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2009;97:17–41. doi: 10.1037/a0015575. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources