ArticlePsychological research2021
Mood state and conflict adaptation: an update and a diffusion model analysis.
Article in Psychological research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ten years Diffusion Model for Conflict (DMC) tasks: Theoretical foundations, applications, practical recommendations, and open challenges.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026Review
- The temporal dynamics of metacognitive experiences track rational adaptations in task performance.Communications psychology · 2025Article
- Similarities of SNARC, cognitive Simon, and visuomotor Simon effects in terms of response time distributions, hand-stimulus proximity, and temporal dynamics.Psychological research · 2024Article
- Same same but different: Subtle but consequential differences between two measures to linearly integrate speed and accuracy (LISAS vs. BIS).Behavior research methods · 2023Article
- Performance-contingent reward increases the use of congruent distracting information.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The present study investigated the affective modulation of conflict adaptation. In a first step, we conducted a direct replication of a previous study (Schuch & Pütz, 2018). Positive vs. negative mood state was induced by a success-failure manipulation (between-groups, N = 40 per group). In a subsequent task-switching experiment, the congruency sequence effect was assessed in task repetitions and task switches, measuring conflict adaptation within tasks and between tasks, respectively. We found conflict adaptation (averaged across task repetitions and task switches) to be enhanced in negative mood. We did not replicate our previous finding of enhanced conflict adaptation in task switches in positive mood. In a second step, we combined the replication data with the original data set, yielding a larger database with N = 80 per mood group. Using diffusion modeling, we explored the affective modulation of conflict adaptation in task repetitions. Conflict adaptation was reflected in drift rate, consistent with the idea that response conflict triggers an increase in processing selectivity, thereby attenuating the influence of the irrelevant stimulus dimension. Conflict adaptation was also reflected in boundary separation, suggesting that response conflict on the previous trial triggered an increase in response caution. The mood manipulation did not seem to affect processing selectivity (as captured by drift rate) but affected the setting of response caution (as captured by the boundary separation parameter), with faster and more error-prone responding in the negative than positive mood group. We discuss theoretical implications of these findings, and also briefly consider the affective modulations of other cognitive control measures.
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.