Visual search for schematic emotional faces risks perceptual confound

Negative and Positive Bias for Emotional Faces: Evidence from the Attention and Working Memory Paradigms

Visual attention and visual working memory (VWM) are two major cognitive functions in humans, and they have much in common. A growing body of research has investigated the effect of emotional information on visual attention and VWM. Interestingly, contradictory findings have supported both a negative bias and a positive bias toward emotional faces (e.g., angry faces or happy faces) in the attention and VWM fields. We found that the classical paradigms-that is, the visual search paradigm in attention and the change detection paradigm in VWM-are considerably similar. The settings of these paradigms could therefore be responsible for the contradictory results. In this paper, we compare previous controversial results from behavioral and neuroscience studies using these two paradigms. We suggest three possible contributing factors that have significant impacts on the contradictory conclusions regarding different emotional bias effects; these factors are stimulus choice, experimental setting, and cognitive process. We also propose new research directions and guidelines for future studies.

The unexpected killer: effects of stimulus threat and negative affectivity on inattentional blindness

Inattentional blindness (IB) occurs when observers fail to detect unexpected objects or events. Despite the adaptive importance of detecting unexpected threats, relatively little research has examined how stimulus threat influences IB. The current study was designed to explore the effects of stimulus threat on IB. Past research has also demonstrated that individuals with elevated negative affectivity have an attentional bias towards threat-related stimuli; therefore, the current study also examined whether state and trait levels of negative affectivity predicted IB for threat-related stimuli. One hundred and eleven participants (87 female, aged 17-40 years) completed an IB task that included both threat-related and neutral unexpected stimuli, while their eye movements were tracked. Participants were significantly more likely to detect the threatening stimulus (19%) than the neutral stimulus (11%) p  =  .035, odds ratio (OR)  =  4.0, 95% confidence interval OR [1.13, 14.17]. Neither state nor trait levels of negative affectivity were significantly associated with IB. These results suggest observers are more likely to detect threat-related unexpected objects, consistent with the threat superiority effect observed in other paradigms. However, most observers were blind to both unexpected stimuli, highlighting the profound influence of expectations and task demands on our ability to perceive even potentially urgent and life-threatening information.

Electrophysiological evidence for attentional capture by irrelevant angry facial expressions

Attention is believed to be biased toward threatening objects or faces. Therefore, we tested whether angry face stimuli would capture attention even when they are irrelevant to the task. Observers searched for a neutral face with a tilted nose. On some trials, the target was shown together with an irrelevant angry or happy face and we measured the N2pc (an electrophysiological marker of attentional selectivity) to the distractor expression. We found that angry distractors triggered an N2pc, whereas happy distractors did not. Follow-up experiments explored the reliability of the N2pc to angry distractors using upright or inverted angry faces, the eye or mouth region of angry faces and face-like stimuli. We conclude that a threatening expression has a high attentional priority due to its emotional content and captures attention despite being irrelevant for the task.

Threatening scenes but not threatening faces shorten time-to-contact estimates

We previously reported that time-to-contact (TTC) judgments of threatening scene pictures (e.g., frontal attacks) resulted in shortened estimations and were mediated by cognitive processes, and that judgments of threatening (e.g., angry) face pictures resulted in a smaller effect and did not seem cognitively mediated. In the present study, the effects of threatening scenes and faces were compared in two different tasks. An effect of threatening scene pictures occurred in a prediction-motion task, which putatively requires cognitive motion extrapolation, but not in a relative TTC judgment task, which was designed to be less reliant on cognitive processes. An effect of threatening face pictures did not occur in either task. We propose that an object's explicit potential of threat per se, and not only emotional valence, underlies the effect of threatening scenes on TTC judgments and that such an effect occurs only when the task allows sufficient cognitive processing. Results are consistent with distinctions between predator and social fear systems and different underlying physiological mechanisms. Not all threatening information elicits the same responses, and whether an effect occurs at all may depend on the task and the degree to which the task involves cognitive processes.

Ignoring real faces: effects of valence, threat, and salience

Facial stimuli have been shown to accrue a special status within visual processing, particularly when attention is prioritized to one face over another on the basis of affective content. This has been examined in relation to the ability of faces to guide or hold attention, or to resist attentional suppression. Previous work has shown that schematic faces can only be partially ignored and that the emotional valence of to-be-ignored faces has little effect. Given recent debates concerning the use of schematic faces, here we examined the ease with which photorealistic faces could be ignored. Although we found evidence of a partial preview benefit for these stimuli, the findings were complex, with stimulus salience, valence, and threat content interacting to affect both the strength of the benefit and target detection efficiency (Exps. 1-3). Experiment 4 then clarified the effects of physical salience and perceived stimulus similarity in the previous experiments, demonstrating that a combination of these factors is likely to account for the search patterns observed.

Age-related differences in the distractor previewing effect with schematic faces of emotions

Young and older adults searched for a unique face in a set of three schematic faces and identified a secondary feature of the target. The faces could be negative, positive, or neutral. Young adults were slower and less accurate in searching for a negative face among neutral faces when they had previewed a display of negative faces than when they had previewed neutral faces, indicating an emotional distractor previewing effect (DPE), but this effect was eliminated with inverted faces. The DPE is an index of inter-trial inhibition to keep attention away from previewed, non-target information. Older adults also showed such an emotional DPE, but it was present with both upright and inverted faces. These results show that, in general, both young and old participants are sensitive to trial history, yet the different patterns of results suggest that these two groups remember and use different types of perceptual information when searching through emotional faces.

No prior entry for threat-related faces: evidence from temporal order judgments

Previous research showed that threat-related faces, due to their intrinsic motivational relevance, capture attention more readily than neutral faces. Here we used a standard temporal order judgment (TOJ) task to assess whether negative (either angry or fearful) emotional faces, when competing with neutral faces for attention selection, may lead to a prior entry effect and hence be perceived as appearing first, especially when uncertainty is high regarding the order of the two onsets. We did not find evidence for this conjecture across five different experiments, despite the fact that participants were invariably influenced by asynchronies in the respective onsets of the two competing faces in the pair, and could reliably identify the emotion in the faces. Importantly, by systematically varying task demands across experiments, we could rule out confounds related to suboptimal stimulus presentation or inappropriate task demands. These findings challenge the notion of an early automatic capture of attention by (negative) emotion. Future studies are needed to investigate whether the lack of systematic bias of attention by emotion is imputed to the primacy of a non-emotional cue to resolve the TOJ task, which in turn prevents negative emotion to exert an early bottom-up influence on the guidance of spatial and temporal attention.