ArticleEmotion (Washington, D.C.)2018
Attentional capture by simultaneous pleasant and unpleasant emotional distractors.
Article in Emotion (Washington, D.C.), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The influence of perceptual load on behavioral interference of simultaneous positive and negative emotional distractors.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2025Article
- Electrophysiological normative responses to emotional, neutral, and cigarette-related images.Psychophysiology · 2023Article
- The Time Course of Dorsal and Rostral-Ventral Anterior Cingulate Cortex Activity in the Emotional Stroop Experiment Reveals Valence and Arousal Aberrant Modulation in Patients with Schizophrenia.Brain topography · 2019Article
- Influence of Attention Control on Implicit and Explicit Emotion Processing of Face and Body: Evidence From Flanker and Same-or-Different Paradigms.Frontiers in psychology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Both high-arousal pleasant and unpleasant task-irrelevant stimuli capture attention and divert processing away from the main task leading to impaired behavioral performance in concurrent tasks. Most studies have separately investigated interference effects of unpleasant and pleasant stimuli on behavior. Thus, little is known about how pleasant and unpleasant task-irrelevant stimuli influence behavior simultaneously. In the present study, we investigated this question during a visual-letter search task. We tested two alternative hypotheses about the influence of simultaneous pleasant and unpleasant task-irrelevant stimuli on task performance. If behavior is purely determined by the intensity of the distractor stimuli (independent of valence), then we would expect the interference effect of simultaneous pleasant and unpleasant distractors to be similar to the influence of two pleasant or two unpleasant distractor stimuli. In contrast, because of opponent interactions between appetitive and aversive motivational systems, the interference effect of simultaneous pleasant and unpleasant stimuli might be weakened. We found that the interference effect of a compound pleasant-plus-unpleasant stimulus was greater than that of a neutral-plus-emotional stimulus and similar to that of two pleasant or two unpleasant stimuli. These results suggest that at the level of behavior, the influence of joint pleasant and unpleasant task-irrelevant stimuli during perception is mainly determined by the intensity of the stimuli, and independent of their valence. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.