↓ Skip to main content

How Positive Affect Modulates Proactive Control: Reduced Usage of Informative Cues Under Positive Affect with Low Arousal

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
47 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
85 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
How Positive Affect Modulates Proactive Control: Reduced Usage of Informative Cues Under Positive Affect with Low Arousal
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00265
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kerstin Fröber, Gesine Dreisbach

Abstract

An example of proactive control is the usage of informative cues to prepare for an upcoming task. Here the authors will present data from a series of three experiments, showing that positive affect along with low arousal reduces proactive control in form of a reduced reliance on informative cues. In three affect groups, neutral or positive affective picture stimuli with low and high arousal preceded every trial. In Experiments 1 and 2, using a simple response cueing paradigm with informative cues (66% cue validity), a reduced cue validity effect (CVE) was found under positive affect with low arousal. To test the robustness of the effect and to see whether reactive control is also modulated by positive affect, Experiment 3 used a cued task switching paradigm with predicitive cues (75% cue validity). As expected, a reduced CVE was again found specifically in the positive affect condition with low arousal, but only for task repetitions. Furthermore, there was no difference in switch costs between affect groups (with and without task cues). Taken together, the reduced CVE indicates that positive affect with low arousal reduces proactive control, while comparable switch costs suggest that there is no influence of positive affect on reactive control.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Israel 1 1%
Unknown 84 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 22%
Student > Bachelor 14 16%
Student > Master 11 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 12%
Researcher 9 11%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 11 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 53 62%
Arts and Humanities 3 4%
Neuroscience 3 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 2%
Other 5 6%
Unknown 17 20%
Attention Score in Context

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 30 July 2012.
All research outputs
#20,759,001
of 23,362,684 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#24,925
of 31,098 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#224,103
of 246,907 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#406
of 482 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,362,684 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,098 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 246,907 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 482 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.