ArticlePloS one2020
Valence and arousal of words in visual and conceptual interference control efficiency.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Limitations of cognitive control on emotional distraction - Congruency in the Color Stroop task does not modulate the Emotional Stroop effect.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2022Pooled it
- The role of subjective significance, valence and arousal in the explicit processing of emotion-laden words.PeerJ · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cognitive control efficiency is susceptible to the emotional state of an individual. The aim of the current experiment was to search for the role of valence and arousal of emotion-laden words in a performance efficiency of a modified emotional Stroop task (EST) combined with the flanker task. Both paradigms allow for the measurement of the interference control, but interference appears on different stages of stimulus processing. In the flanker task, the interference is perceptual, while in EST, it is based on the emotional meaning of stimuli. We expected to find the effects of emotionality of words, that is, arousal and valence levels, for interference measured with EST. In a series of two experiments, the results confirmed that a high arousal level enlarges the reaction latencies to the EST. We also identified interaction between valence and arousal in shaping reaction latencies. We found the flanker congruency effect. We did not find interactions between emotional factors and flanker congruency. This suggests that interference measured with the EST and flanker task are in fact different from one another, and while using the modified EST combined with the flanker task, the word-meaning effects do not interfere with pure perceptual interferences.
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.