ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2023
Reduced attentional inhibition for peripheral distractors of angry faces under central perceptual load in deaf individuals: evidence from an event-related potentials study.
Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- The effect of high approach-motivated positive affect on selective attention under high perceptual load.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Studies have shown that deaf individuals distribute more attention to the peripheral visual field and exhibit enhanced visual processing for peripheral stimuli relative to hearing individuals. This leads to better detection of peripheral target motion and simple static stimuli in hearing individuals. However, when threatening faces that represent dangerous signals appear as non-targets in the periphery, it remains unclear whether deaf individuals would retain an advantage over hearing individuals in detecting them. Methods: In this study, 23 deaf and 28 hearing college students were included. A modified perceptual load paradigm and event-related potentials (ERPs) were adopted. In the task, participants were instructed to search for a target letter in a central letter array, while task-irrelevant face distractors (happy, neutral, and angry faces) were simultaneously presented in the periphery while the central perceptual load was manipulated. Results: Behavioral data showed that angry faces slowed deaf participants' responses to the target while facilitating the responses of hearing participants. At the electrophysiological level, we found modulation of P1 amplitude by central load only in hearing individuals. Interestingly, larger interference from angry face distractors was associated with higher P1 differential amplitude only in deaf individuals. Additionally, the amplitude of N170 for happy face distractors was smaller than that for angry and neutral face distractors in deaf participants. Conclusion: The present data demonstrates that, despite being under central perceptual load, deaf individuals exhibit less attentional inhibition to peripheral, goal-irrelevant angry faces than hearing individuals. The result may reflect a compensatory mechanism in which, in the absence of auditory alertness to danger, the detection of visually threatening information outside of the current attentional focus has a high priority.
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.