↓ Skip to main content

Neural Correlates of Emotion Processing in Word Detection Task

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 Mendeley
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
Neural Correlates of Emotion Processing in Word Detection Task
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, May 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00832
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wenshuang Zhao, Liang Chen, Chunxia Zhou, Wenbo Luo

Abstract

In our previous study, we have proposed a three-stage model of emotion processing; in the current study, we investigated whether the ERP component may be different when the emotional content of stimuli is task-irrelevant. In this study, a dual-target rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) task was used to investigate how the emotional content of words modulates the time course of neural dynamics. Participants performed the task in which affectively positive, negative, and neutral adjectives were rapidly presented while event-related potentials (ERPs) were recorded from 18 undergraduates. The N170 component was enhanced for negative words relative to positive and neutral words. This indicates that automatic processing of negative information occurred at an early perceptual processing stage. In addition, later brain potentials such as the late positive potential (LPP) were only enhanced for positive words in the 480-580-ms post-stimulus window, while a relatively large amplitude signal was elicited by positive and negative words between 580 and 680 ms. These results indicate that different types of emotional content are processed distinctly at different time windows of the LPP, which is in contrast with the results of studies on task-relevant emotional processing. More generally, these findings suggest that a negativity bias to negative words remains to be found in emotion-irrelevant tasks, and that the LPP component reflects dynamic separation of emotion valence.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users 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 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 37 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 22%
Researcher 3 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Student > Bachelor 2 5%
Student > Postgraduate 2 5%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 16 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 11 30%
Neuroscience 4 11%
Linguistics 2 5%
Decision Sciences 1 3%
Computer Science 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 18 49%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 12 June 2018.
All research outputs
#14,982,922
of 23,047,237 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#16,312
of 30,358 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#199,337
of 330,718 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#469
of 656 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,047,237 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,358 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 330,718 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 656 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.