Emotional capture by fearful expressions varies with psychopathic traits

Task-irrelevant emotional expressions are known to capture attention, with the extent of “emotional capture” varying with psychopathic traits in antisocial samples. We investigated whether this variation extends throughout the continuum of psychopathic traits (and co-occurring trait anxiety) in a community sample. Participants (N?=?85) searched for a target face among facial distractors. As predicted, angry and fearful faces interfered with search, indicated by slower reaction times relative to neutral faces. When fear appeared as either target or distractor, diminished emotional capture was seen with increasing affective-interpersonal psychopathic traits. However, moderation analyses revealed that this was only when lifestyle-antisocial psychopathic traits were low, consistent with evidence suggesting that these two facets of psychopathic traits display opposing relationships with emotional reactivity. Anxiety did not show the predicted relationships with emotional capture effects. Findings show that normative variation in high-level individual differences in psychopathic traits influence automatic bias to emotional stimuli.     

Attentional capture by irrelevant emotional distractor faces is contingent on implicit attentional settings

Although expressions of facial emotion hold a special status in attention relative to other complex objects, whether they summon our attention automatically and against our intentions remains a debated issue. Studies supporting the strong view that attentional capture by facial expressions of emotion is entirely automatic reported that a unique (singleton) emotional face distractor interfered with search for a target that was also unique on a different dimension. Participants could therefore search for the odd-one out face to locate the target and attentional capture by irrelevant emotional faces might be contingent on the adoption of an implicit set for singletons. Here, confirming this hypothesis, an irrelevant emotional face captured attention when the target was the unique face with a discrepant orientation, both when this orientation was unpredictable and when it remained constant. By contrast, no such capture was observed when the target could not be found by monitoring displays for a discrepant face and participants had to search for a face with a specific orientation. Our findings show that attentional capture by emotional faces is not purely stimulus driven and thereby resolve the apparent inconsistency that prevails in the literature on the automaticity of attentional capture by emotional faces.     

Attending to emotional expressions: no evidence for automatic capture in the dot-probe task

Research on automatic attention to emotional faces offers mixed results. Therefore we examined validity effects for facial expressions of different emotions (compared to neutral faces) with a dot-probe paradigm in seven studies (total N?=?308). Systematic variations of type of emotion, CTI, task, cue size, and masking allow for a differentiated assessment of attentional capture by emotions and possible moderating factors. Results indicate a general absence of emotional validity effects as well as a lack of significant interactions with either of the manipulated factors, indicating that facial expressions of emotions do not capture attention in a fully automatic fashion. These findings suggest that situational and contextual factors have to be taken into account when investigating attentional capture of emotional faces.     

Selectively ignoring locations does not modulate contingent involuntary orienting,but selectively attending does

Attending to a location in the visual field facilitates processing of objects in that location, and numerous studies have revealed processing benefits by precuing target locations. Recent studies have also demonstrated that precuing a location to ignore reduces distraction by items in that location; however, precuing a feature (colour) to ignore increases distractor interference, at least before a template for rejection is established. Thus, locations, not features, can be selectively ignored. The present study used a spatial cuing task to examine whether featurally-relevant items are selected when they appear in ignored locations. The results revealed contingent attentional capture by target-relevant cues (red cue when searching for red targets, but not for onset targets), even when the cue appeared in a location that was ignored. Importantly, this was equivalent to contingent capture elicited by cues in non-ignored locations. However, when observers were precued to the target location, contingent capture was largely eliminated. The results suggest salient items with target-relevant features are selected from selectively ignored locations, but focusing attention onto a location can preclude capture by salient and target-relevant items.     

负性情绪对注意促进效应的调节

近期研究发现,目标探测性质的注意分散并不会削弱,甚至会提高与之同时进行的记忆任务成绩,表现出注意促进效应（ABE）,但该效应可能会受到记忆材料独特性的调节。为了验证该假设,本文采用负性刺激为记忆材料,以目标探测任务为干扰任务,探讨负性情绪对ABE的调节。结果发现,与中性材料相比,负性材料的ABE有所减弱;而高唤醒的负性材料则没有表现出任何的ABE。可见目标探测所产生的促进作用会受到背景材料是否具有独特性的限制。     

Sad people are more accurate at face recognition than happy people

Mood has varied effects on cognitive performance including the accuracy of face recognition (Lundh & Ost, 1996). Three experiments are presented here that explored face recognition abilities in mood-induced participants. Experiment 1 demonstrated that happy-induced participants are less accurate and have a more conservative response bias than sad-induced participants in a face recognition task. Using a remember/know/guess procedure, Experiment 2 showed that sad-induced participants had more conscious recollections of faces than happy-induced participants. Additionally, sad-induced participants could recognise all faces accurately, whereas, happy- and neutral-induced participants recognised happy faces more accurately than sad faces. In Experiment 3, these effects were not observed when participants intentionally learnt the faces, rather than incidentally learnt the faces. It is suggested that happy-induced participants do not process faces as elaborately as sad-induced participants.     

Attention during visual secondary tasks in driving: Adaptation to the demands of the driving task

Visual attention in driving with visual secondary task is compared for two visual secondary tasks. N = 40 subjects completed a 1 h test drive in a motion-base driving simulator. During the drive, participants either solved an externally paced, highly demanding visual task or a self paced menu system task. The secondary tasks were offered in defined critical and non-critical driving situations. Eye movement behavior was analyzed and compared for both tasks. Before starting the secondary tasks, eye movement behavior shows a smaller standard deviation of gaze as well as longer fixation durations for both tasks. The comparison between the two tasks indicates that drivers use the possibilities the self paced task offers: during the secondary task, they monitor the driving scene with longer fixations and show a greater standard deviation of gaze position. Furthermore, independently of the type of secondary task, drivers adapt their eye movement behavior to the demands of the situation. In critical driving situations they direct a larger proportion of glance time to the driving task. Last, the relation between glance behavior and collisions is analyzed. Results indicate that collisions go together with an inadequate distribution of attention during distraction. The results are interpreted regarding the attentional processes involved in driving with visual secondary tasks. Based on the similarities and differences between the two secondary tasks, a cognitive approach is developed which assumes that the control of attention during distraction is based on a mental situational model of the driving situation.     

工作记忆负荷对注意捕获的影响研究

注意捕获研究对于探讨两种控制过程:自上而下的加工与自下而上的加工之间的关系具有重要的意义。本文通过检验不同工作记忆负荷对注意捕获的影响,探讨自上而下的认知控制对注意捕获的影响机制。本研究共包括二个实验:实验一比较了单、双任务条件对颜色干扰子注意捕获的影响;实验二探讨了不同工作记忆负荷对颜色干扰子注意捕获的影响。实验结果表明:工作记忆不仅在选择性注意任务中具有认知控制作用,而且这种作用能扩展到注意捕获现象中。注意捕获不是纯粹的刺激驱动的加工过程,它还受到自上而下的认知控制的调节。具体表现为,随着工作记忆负荷水平的增加,无关干扰子产生的注意捕获的程度增大。     

Actions modulate attentional capture

The purpose of the present study was to determine whether the action system plays a role in determining which stimulus characteristics capture attention by assessing the interference effects caused by dynamic discontinuities that have similar attention-capturing properties, but different action affordances. Results revealed that offset distractors caused significant interference when onset targets were presented in a keypress task, but did not increase reaction times when the same onset targets were presented in a goal-directed aiming task. In contrast, onset distractors caused interference when offset targets were presented in both keypress and aiming tasks. This pattern of results suggests that the attentional set, and thus the properties of stimuli that capture attention, is modulated by the interaction between stimulus and response expectations.     

Distractor interference in focused attention tasks is not mediated by attention capture

Distractor stimuli possessing information that is relevant for a task (henceforth, task-relevant distractors) often interfere with task performance. The interference by task-relevant distractors is observed even when distractors are positioned outside the main attentional focus. We investigated whether such interference is due to an attention capture by the distractors. Participants responded to a target colour while ignoring word distractors positioned within (Experiment 1) or outside (Experiments 2 and 3) the attentional focus. The words carried task-relevant information in their colour and personally significant information in their content. Because personally significant information affects performance only when positioned in an attended region, it was used as a marker for the locus of the attentional focus. As expected, when distractors were attended, both task-relevant and personally significant information affected performance. However, when distractors were unattended, only task-relevant information caused interference, suggesting that attention did not shift to the distractors’ location. We discuss possible accounts for interference effects in focused-attention tasks.