| Title |
Only “efficient” emotional stimuli affect the content of working memory during free-recollection from natural scenes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cognitive Processing, November 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10339-017-0846-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Arianna Buttafuoco, Tiziana Pedale, Tony W. Buchanan, Valerio Santangelo |
| Abstract |
Emotional events are thought to have privileged access to attention and memory, consuming resources needed to encode competing emotionally neutral stimuli. However, it is not clear whether this detrimental effect is automatic or depends on the successful maintenance of the specific emotional object within working memory. Here, participants viewed everyday scenes including an emotional object among other neutral objects followed by a free-recollection task. Results showed that emotional objects-irrespective of their perceptual saliency-were recollected more often than neutral objects. The probability of being recollected increased as a function of the arousal of the emotional objects, specifically for negative objects. Successful recollection of emotional objects (positive or negative) from a scene reduced the overall number of recollected neutral objects from the same scene. This indicates that only emotional stimuli that are efficient in grabbing (and then consuming) available attentional resources play a crucial role during the encoding of competing information, with a subsequent bias in the recollection of neutral representations. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 20 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 10% |
| Professor | 2 | 10% |
| Researcher | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 15% |
| Unknown | 6 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 9 | 45% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 5% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 5% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 7 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 November 2017.
All research outputs
#18,576,855
of 23,008,860 outputs
Outputs from Cognitive Processing
#245
of 337 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#320,074
of 431,651 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cognitive Processing
#7
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,008,860 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 337 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.3. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 431,651 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.