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
. 2009 Jul;45(4):655-666.
doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2009.02.015. Epub 2009 Mar 5.

Psychophysiological Evidence of Response Conflict and Strategic Control of Responses in Affective Priming

Bruce D Bartholow  1 , Monica A Schepers Riordan  2 , J Scott Saults  1 , Sarah A Lust  1
Affiliations

Psychophysiological Evidence of Response Conflict and Strategic Control of Responses in Affective Priming

Bruce D Bartholow et al. J Exp Soc Psychol. 2009 Jul.

Abstract

This experiment investigated the role of conflict in the response and evaluative categorization systems in the affective congruency effect using event-related brain potentials (ERPs). Participants completed a primed evaluative decision task in which the proportion of congruent to incongruent trials was manipulated. The size of the affective congruency effect increased along with the proportion of congruent trials. ERP data identified the locus of this effect in the response system: the lateralized readiness potential (LRP) showed that preferential response activation occurred in motor cortex following prime onset, and the fronto-central N2 (conflict monitoring) component indicated that conflict occurred when the response activated by the prime differed from the target response, irrespective of the affective congruency of the prime and target. The extent of this conflict covaried with strategic processing of primes, as participants directed less attention to primes that were likely to elicit conflict. These data support a response conflict account of affective congruency effects in the evaluative decision task and indicate that strategic control of attention is important in determining the extent to which conflict occurs.

Keywords: ERPs; affective congruency; affective priming; categorization; event-related potentials; lateralized readiness potential; response conflict.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Mean target response times (panel A) and error rates (panel B) as a function of trial type and the probability of congruent trials. Vertical bars denote standard errors.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
The lateralized readiness potential (LRP) measured at central electrodes (C3 and C4) on congruent and incongruent trials across congruence probability levels. Only correct response trials were included in these waveforms. Of primary interest here was the amplitude of the LRP between prime onset and target onset, which indicates relative response activation elicited by the primes. The formula used to derive the LRP is applied with reference to the correct response hand in each condition, such that negative (upward) deflections reflect preferential activation of the correct response, whereas positive (downward) deflections indicate preferential activation of the incorrect response.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
ERP waveforms measured at FCz depicting the N2 component (prominent negativity peaking approximately 400 ms post-stimulus) as a function of target congruence and the probability of congruent trials. The vertical arrow on the timeline indicates target onset.
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
ERP waveforms (at the Fz electrode) elicited by primes in 20%, 50%, and 80% congruent conditions. The P1 component peaks at 206 ms, and the P3 component peaks at 650 ms. The vertical arrow on the timeline indicates prime onset.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. American Encephalographic Society (1994). Guideline thirteen: Guidelines for standard electrode position nomenclature. Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology, 11, 111–113. - PubMed
    1. Abrams RL, Klinger MR & Greenwald AG (2002). Subliminal words activate semantic categories (not automated motor responses). Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 9, 100–106. - PubMed
    1. Anllo-Vento L, Schoenfeld MA, & Hillyard SA (2004). Cortical mechanisms of visual attention: Electrophysiological and neuroimaging studies. In Posner MI (Ed.), Cognitive neuroscience of attention (pp. 180–193). New York: Guilford Press.
    1. Bargh JA, Chaiken S, Raymond P, & Hymes C (1996). The automatic evaluation effect: Unconditional automatic attitude activation with a pronunciation task. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 32, 104–128.
    1. Bartholow BD, Pearson MA, Dickter C, Sher KJ, Fabiani M, & Gratton G (2005). Strategic control and medial frontal negativity: Beyond errors and response conflict. Psychophysiology, 42, 33–42. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources