ArticleAging clinical and experimental research2022
The role of automatic and controlled processes in the positivity effect for older adults.
Article in Aging clinical and experimental research, 2022. 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 Modulating Effect of Cognitive Reserve on Dysfunctional Beliefs in Aging.Europe's journal of psychology · 2026Article
- More organized white matter is associated with positivity bias in older adults.Brain imaging and behavior · 2024Article
- Aging and distractor resistance in working memory: Does emotional valence matter?BMC psychology · 2022Article
- Executive Functions in Decision Making under Ambiguity and Risk in Healthy Adults: A Scoping Review Adopting the Hot and Cold Executive Functions Perspective.Brain sciences · 2022Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe positivity effect can be defined as an age-related attentional preference for positive information. The age differences are due to an attentional bias in which the young focused more intently on the negative stimuli, whereas the older attend to capture positive stimuli. There are two cognitive-emotional models that can explain the positivity effect: the socio-emotional selectivity theory (SST) and the dynamic integration theory (DIT). The SST states that in the older the positivity effect is related to controlled attentional processes, on the opposite, the DIT states that the positivity effect is related to automatic processes.
aimsThe main aim of the present study was to examine automatic and controlled attentional orienting of young and older adults in the positivity effect.
methodsTo reach these goals and to verify the generalization of the previous results, we used two experimental paradigms: the dot-probe task and the visual discrimination task with facial stimuli with positive (happy and surprise), negative (fair and angry) and neutral emotional expressions. 50 older and 35 young adults participated in this study.
resultsThe older adults reacted faster to positive emotions than neutral or negative ones. They had similar RTs for the three types of emotions in both automatic and controlled attention. DISCUSSION: The findings are discussed in light of SST and DIT theories.
conclusionsThis study confirms the positivity effect for the older subjects and support the idea that both automatic and controlled processes play a key role in this effect.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34704202What 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.