Vivid: How valence and arousal influence word processing under different task demands

Abstract

In this study, we used event-related potentials to examine how different dimensions of emotion-valence and arousal-influence different stages of word processing under different task demands. In two experiments, two groups of participants viewed the same single emotional and neutral words while carrying out different tasks. In both experiments, valence (pleasant, unpleasant, and neutral) was fully crossed with arousal (high and low). We found that the task made a substantial contribution to how valence and arousal modulated the late positive complex (LPC), which is thought to reflect sustained evaluative processing (particularly of emotional stimuli). When participants performed a semantic categorization task in which emotion was not directly relevant to task performance, the LPC showed a larger amplitude for high-arousal than for low-arousal words, but no effect of valence. In contrast, when participants performed an overt valence categorization task, the LPC showed a large effect of valence (with unpleasant words eliciting the largest positivity), but no effect of arousal. These data show not only that valence and arousal act independently to influence word processing, but that their relative contributions to prolonged evaluative neural processes are strongly influenced by the situational demands (and by individual differences, as revealed in a subsequent analysis of subjective judgments).Keywords Event-related potentials . ERP . LPC . LPP . Late positivity . Emotion . Valence . Arousal . Language . Word processing . Task Emotional stimuli elicit a rapid and coordinated set of responses. They can capture attention, guide evaluative judgments, and mobilize autonomic reflexes quickly and powerfully. These emotion responses are generally described as having an appetitive/aversive direction, called valence, and a level of activation, called arousal. In this study, we used event-related potentials (ERPs), a direct measure of online neural activity, to ask how valence and arousal influence different stages of emotional word processing under different tasks demands.

Increased neural sensitivity to self‐relevant stimuli in major depressive disorder

“…In Study 2, however, individuals with depression exhibited an increased LPP specifically to negative, and not positive, endings to self‐referential sentences. These differences in the LPP to valence specificity may be explained by the context in which the words were processed and the task used (Delaney‐Busch et al, ; Fields & Kuperberg, ; Hinojosa, Mendez‐Bertolo, & Pozo, ), as similar inconsistencies have been observed in previous work using different tasks. For example, Auerbach and colleagues () found a larger LPP in individuals with depression than healthy controls when participants were asked to classify a word as relevant to them, whereas Deldin and colleagues (; Dai et al, ) did not observe between‐groups differences in two samples that completed a working‐memory task that involved paying attention to the orthography of the word rather than judging its content.…”

“…One possible explanation is the differences in task. For example, Delaney‐Busch, Wilkie, and Kuperberg () demonstrated that both valence and arousal effects are impacted by task demands, such as semantic versus valence coding instructions. Here, Study 1 presented single words in a passive‐viewing paradigm while Study 2 required a response in agreement of the total sentence.…”

Selective visual attention to emotional words: Early parallel frontal and visual activations followed by interactive effects in visual cortex

“…However, without full factorial manipulations of valence and arousal, including low and high arousing positive, negative, and neutral stimuli, the unique contribution of either dimension cannot be determined conclusively. A recent EEG study on emotion word processing reports unique effects of valence and arousal on the LPP, which further varied with task [Delaney-Busch et al, 2016] and other findings suggest LPP arousal modulations for valenceneutral arousing stimuli [Bayer et al, 2012;Recio et al, 2014]. The current design precludes conclusions on these issues.…”

Dynamic Effects of Self-Relevance and Task on the Neural Processing of Emotional Words in Context

“…2 It is generally larger to emotional than neutral stimuli and it is seen to both pictures ( Olofsson et al, 2008 ; Hajcak et al, 2010 ) and words ( Kissler et al, 2006 ; Citron, 2012 ). Its amplitude is enhanced by tasks that draw attention to emotional features of stimuli (e.g., Naumann et al, 1997 ; Fischler and Bradley, 2006 ; Schupp et al, 2007 ; Holt et al, 2009 ), and, more recently, it has also become clear that task demands can also influence the sensitivity of the LPC to different dimensions of emotional stimuli ( Delaney-Busch et al, in press ; see also Fischler and Bradley, 2006 ; Bayer et al, 2012 ). Importantly, the LPC evoked by emotional stimuli is not only influenced by their intrinsic emotional properties, but also by the context in which they are encountered.…”