Attentional inhibition has social-emotional consequences for unfamiliar faces.

MGH Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Harvard Medical School, Charlestown, MA 02129, USA.
Psychological Science (Impact Factor: 4.43). 11/2005; 16(10):753-8. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01609.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Visual attention studies often rely on response time measures to show the impact of attentional facilitation and inhibition. Here we extend the investigation of the effects of attention on behavior and show that prior attentional states associated with unfamiliar faces can influence subsequent social-emotional judgments about those faces. Participants were shown pairs of face images and were asked to withhold a response if a transparent stop-signal cue appeared over one of the faces. This served to associate the cued face with an inhibitory state. Later, when asked to make social-emotional choices about these face pairs, participants chose uncued faces more often than cued faces as "more trustworthy" and chose cued faces more often than uncued faces as "less trustworthy." For perceptual choices, there was no effect of how the question was framed (which face is "on a lighter background" vs. "on a darker background"). These results suggest that attentional inhibition can be associated with socially relevant stimuli, such as faces, and can have specific, deleterious effects on social-emotional judgments.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We analyzed whether attending to versus ignoring in- and out-group members systematically influences intergroup bias. In two studies (N = 187), we manipulated attention by asking participants to count the appearance of in-group (or out-group) members in the presence of out-group (or in-group) distractors. Prior to and during the counting task, we assessed intergroup bias by having participants rate the group members on a liking scale. The results show that the change in intergroup bias from baseline to experimental ratings depended on the attention focus. Whereas counting in-group members (while ignoring the out-group) increased intergroup bias, counting out-group members (while ignoring the in-group) decreased intergroup bias. Thus, we provide evidence that consequences of goal-directed interactions with in- and out-group stimuli (i.e., exposure and selection) systematically influence intergroup bias. We propose that in future research such processes should be considered in addition to social–motivational factors in the analysis of intergroup bias.
    Social Psychological and Personality Science. 07/2014;
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of the present study is to investigate the electrophysiological correlates with the subsequent emotional consequence of neutral stimuli by varying the relative probability of Go and Nogo trails. At Go25 condition (25% probability of Go stimuli), Go stimuli produced enhancement value effect and the amplitude of P3 component was larger than other Go conditions. In contrast, at Nogo 50 condition (50% probability of Nogo stimuli), Nogo stimuli produced devaluation effect and elicited smaller N2 and larger P3 than other conditions. These data provided evidence for the hypothesis that response and inhibition triggered by neutral stimuli impacted their subsequent emotional evaluation, that is, behavioral response associated with neutral stimuli enhanced their cheerfulness evaluation, whereas response inhibition produced devaluation effects.
    Journal of Integrative Neuroscience 12/2013; 12(4):449-60. · 1.12 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Reward-predicting stimuli can induce maladaptive behavior by provoking action tendencies that conflict with long-term goals. Earlier, we showed that when human participants were permitted to respond for a reward in the presence of a task-irrelevant, reward-predicting stimulus (i.e. goCS+ trials), the CS+ provoked an action tendency to respond compared to when a non-rewarding CS- stimulus was present (i.e. goCS- trials). However, when participants were not permitted to respond, response suppression was recruited to mitigate the action tendency that was triggered by the motivating CS+ stimulus (i.e. on nogoCS+ trials) (Freeman, Razhas, & Aron, 2014). Here we tested the hypothesis that repeated response suppression over a motivationally-triggered action tendency would reduce subsequent CS+ provocation. We compared groups of participants who had different proportions of nogoCS+ trials, and we measured CS+ provocation on go trials via reaction time. Our results showed that CS+ provocation on go trials was reduced monotonically as the proportion of nogoCS+ trials increased. Further analysis showed that these group differences were best explained by reduced provocation on goCS+ trials that followed nogoCS+ (compared to nogoCS-) trials. Follow-up experiments using a neurophysiological index of motor activity replicated these effects and also suggested that, following nogoCS+ trials, a response suppression mechanism was in place to help prevent subsequent CS+ provocation. Thus, our results show that performing response suppression in the face of a motivating stimulus not only controls responding at that time, but also prevents provocation in the near future. Copyright © 2015. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
    Neuropsychologia 01/2015; · 3.45 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
May 17, 2014