Spatiotemporal competition and task-relevance shape the spatial distribution of emotional interference during rapid visual processing: Evidence from gaze-contingent eye-tracking

Emotional stimuli similarly disrupt attention in both visual fields

People often need to filter relevant from irrelevant information. Irrelevant emotional distractors interrupt this process. But does the degree to which emotional distractors disrupt attention depend on which visual field they appear in? We thought it might for two reasons: (1) people pay slightly more attention to the left than the right visual field, and (2) some research suggests the right-hemisphere (which, in early visual processing, receives left visual field input) has areas specialised for processing emotion. Participants viewed a rapid image-stream in each visual field and reported the rotation of an embedded neutral target preceded by a negative or neutral distractor. We predicted that the degree to which negative (vs. neutral) distractors impaired target detection would be larger when targets appeared in the left than the right stream. This hypothesis was supported, but only when the distractor and target could appear in the same or opposite stream as each other (Experiments 2a-b), not when they always appeared in the same stream as each other (Experiments 1a-1b). However, this effect was driven by superior left-stream accuracy following neutral distractors, and similar left- and right-stream accuracy following negative distractors. Emotional distractors therefore override visuospatial asymmetries and disrupt attention, regardless of visual field.

Spatial distribution of emotional attentional blink under top-down attentional control

Emotion-induced blindness (EIB) refers to the impaired perception of a neutral target that follows an emotional distractor within the time gap of 100-500 ms. Recent studies on EIB show that EIB is spatially localized. Blink occurs when both target and emotional distractor appear in the same stream but not the opposite. However, the influence of top-down attentional control over the dual-stream EIB remains poorly understood. Examining the role of top-down control in EIB will help understand the impact of attentional control over the spatial distribution of EIB and in understanding the Attentional Blink (AB) and EIB distinction. Hence, in the present study, we used dual-stream and manipulated the attentional control by changing the relevance of the emotional image and asking participants to report both emotional and neutral targets. Our results show a similar level of blink irrespective of the spatial location of the emotional T1, suggesting the role of attentional control on the spatial distribution of EIB and in the AB-EIB distinction. Results have implications for the theoretical understanding of EIB.

The effect of acute stress on spatial selectivity in dual-stream emotion induced blindness: The role of cortisol and spontaneous frontal EEG theta/beta ratio

The current study explored the effect of acute stress on dual-stream emotion induced blindness (EIB). We focused on spatially localised target processing induced by stress, as well as the role of cortisol and the frontal EEG theta/beta ratio (TBR). Eight-minutes spontaneous EEG data were recorded first. After performing a Trier Social Stress Test (TSST) or a corresponding control task a week apart, the participants completed a dual-stream EIB task. Changes in cortisol levels over time were likewise recorded. We found that stress promoted the target processing in the same stream location as the distractor, eliminating the spatial-localisation effect. Cortisol and frontal TBR positively and negatively, respectively, predicted a reduced spatially localised target detection induced by stress following negative distractors. Overall, acute stress apparently reduced the dual-stream EIB due to the effective allocation of limited resources. Further, the role of cortisol associated with better target detection was more specific to the negative distractor condition and partially disassociated from the general stress response. Cortisol levels and frontal TBR independently predicted the spatially localised processing, suggesting differentiated influence paths of trait and state factors on target detection following emotional distractors.

Don't look now! Emotion-induced blindness: The interplay between emotion and attention

Scientists have long been interested in understanding the influence of emotionally salient stimuli on attention and perception. One experimental paradigm that has shown great promise in demonstrating the effect of such stimuli is emotion-induced blindness. That is, when emotionally salient stimuli are presented in a rapid stream of stimuli, they produce impairments in the perception of task-relevant stimuli, even though they themselves are task irrelevant. This is known as emotion-induced blindness, and it is a profound and robust form of attentional bias. Here, we review the literature on emotion-induced blindness, such as identifying the types of stimuli that elicit it, and its temporal dynamics. We discuss the role of dimensional versus categorical approaches to emotion in relation to emotion-induced blindness. We also synthesize the work examining whether certain individuals, such as those high in anxiety versus psychopathy, succumb to emotion-induced blindness to different extents, and we discuss whether the deficit can be reduced or even abolished. We review the theoretical models that have been proposed to explain the phenomenon. Finally, we identify exciting questions for future research, and elucidate useful frameworks to guide future investigations.

Different Influences of Negative and Neutral Emotional Interference on Working Memory in Trait Anxiety

To examine the interaction of working memory (WM) type with emotional interference in trait anxiety, event-related potentials were measured in a combined WM and emotional task. Participants completed a delayed matching-to-sample task of WM, and emotional pictures were presented during the maintenance interval. The results indicated that negative affect interfered with spatial WM; task-related changes in amplitude were observed in the late positive potential (LPP) and slow waves in both the high and low anxiety groups. We also found an interaction among WM type, emotion, and trait anxiety such that participants with high levels of trait anxiety showed an opposite neural response to verbal and spatial WM tasks compared with individuals with low trait anxiety during the sustained brain activity involved in processing negative or neutral pictures in the delay phase. Our results increase our understanding of the influence of emotions on recognition and the vulnerability of those with trait anxiety to emotional stimuli.

Nontarget emotional stimuli must be highly conspicuous to modulate the attentional blink

The attentional blink (AB) is often considered a top-down phenomenon because it is triggered by matching an initial target (T1) in a rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) stream to a search template. However, the AB is modulated when targets are emotional, and is evoked when a task-irrelevant, emotional critical distractor (CDI) replaces T1. Neither manipulation fully captures the interplay between bottom-up and top-down attention in the AB: Valenced targets intrinsically conflate top-down and bottom-up attention. The CDI approach cannot manipulate second target (T2) valence, which is critical because valenced T2s can "break through" the AB (in the target-manipulation approach). The present research resolves this methodological challenge by indirectly measuring whether a purely bottom-up CDI can modulate report of a subsequent T2. This novel approach adds a valenced CDI to the "classic," two-target AB. Participants viewed RSVP streams containing a T1-CDI pair preceding a variable lag to T2. If the CDI's valence is sufficient to survive the AB, it should modulate T2 performance, indirectly signaling bottom-up capture by an emotional stimulus. Contrary to this prediction, CDI valence only affected the AB when CDIs were also extremely visually conspicuous. Thus, emotional valence alone is insufficient to modulate the AB.

Reduction of emotional distraction during target processing by attentional manipulations

Previous research has demonstrated that fully irrelevant distractors - i.e., not sharing any feature with the target - capture our attention and modulate our responses. In the present study, we explored this interference by irrelevant distractors in a series of three experiments wherein the emotional valence of distractors (negative vs. neutral valence) was manipulated along with endogenous and exogenous attention. We aimed at jointly investigating - within the same paradigm - the possible modulations over the interference effect by these three critical variables in a systematic way. Although we replicated the interference effect by distractors previously reported in Martín-Arévalo et al. (2015), results showed no attentional and only weak emotional valence modulations over the interference effect. We discuss the possible boundary conditions underlying the absence (or weakness) of modulations over the interference effect by distractors observed in our experiments.

Real world familiarity does not reduce susceptibility to emotional disruption of perception: evidence from two temporal attention tasks

The visual system has been found to prioritise emotional stimuli so robustly that their presence can temporarily "blind" people to non-emotional targets in their direct line of vision. This has ostensible implications for the real world: medics must not be blinded to important information despite the trauma they confront, and drivers must not be blinded when passing emotionally engaging billboards. One possibility is that the familiarity of goal-relevant information can protect people's perception of it despite emotional distraction (e.g. drivers' perception might be less impaired by graphic ads when on a familiar road). In two experiments, we tested whether familiarity renders targets more perceptible following the presentation of an emotional distractor in two temporal attention tasks, emotion-induced blindness (Experiment 1) and the attentional blink (Experiment 2). Targets were pictures of familiar or unfamiliar locations. Although, overall, familiar targets were seen better than unfamiliar targets in both studies, stimulus familiarity did not reduce the relative perceptual impairments caused by emotional distractors.