The reciprocal connections between emotion and attention are vital for adaptive behaviour. Previous results demonstrated that the behavioural effects of emotional stimuli on performance are attenuated when executive control is recruited. The current research studied whether this attenuation is modality dependent. In two experiments, negative and neutral pictures were presented shortly before a visual, tactile, or auditory target in a Simon task. All three modalities demonstrated a Simon effect, a conflict adaptation effect, and an emotional interference effect. However, the interaction between picture valence and Simon congruency was found only in the visual task. Specifically, when the Simon target was visual, emotional interference was reduced during incongruent compared to congruent trials. These findings suggest that although the control-related effects observed in the Simon tasks are not modality dependent, the link between emotion and executive control is modality dependent. Presumably, this link occurs only when the emotional stimulus and the target are presented in the same modality.
AisenbergD., & HenikA. (2012). Stop being neutral: Simon takes control!The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65, 295–304. http://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2010.507819
2.
BotvinickM. M., BraverT. S., BarchD. M., CarterC. S., & CohenJ. D. (2001). Conflict monitoring and cognitive control. Psychological Review, 108, 624–652. http://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.108.3.624
3.
BurleB., PossamaïC.-A., VidalF., BonnetM., & HasbroucqT. (2002). Executive control in the Simon effect: An electromyographic and distributional analysis. Psychological Research, 66, 324–336. http://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-002-0105-6
4.
ChambersC. D., StokesM. G., & MattingleyJ. B. (2004). Modality-specific control of strategic spatial attention in parietal cortex. Neuron, 44, 925–930. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2004.12.009
5.
CohenN., & HenikA. (2012). Do irrelevant emotional stimuli impair or improve executive control?Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, 6. http://doi.org/10.3389/fnint.2012.00033
6.
CohenN., HenikA., & MorN. (2011). Can emotion modulate attention? Evidence for reciprocal links in the Attentional Network Test. Experimental Psychology, 58, 171–179. http://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000083
7.
CohenN., HenikA., & MoyalN. (2012). Executive control attenuates emotional effects—For high reappraisers only?Emotion, 12, 970–979. http://doi.org/10.1037/a0026890
8.
CohenN., MorN., & HenikA. (2015). Linking executive control and emotional response: A training procedure to reduce rumination. Clinical Psychological Science, 3, 15–25. doi:10.1177/2167702614530114
9.
CohenN., MoyalN., & HenikA. (2015). Executive control suppresses pupillary responses to aversive stimuli. Biological psychology, 112, 1–11. doi:10.1016/j.biopsycho.2015.09.006
10.
CohenN., MoyalN., Lichtenstein-VidneL., & HenikA. (2016). Explicit vs. implicit emotional processing: The interaction between processing type and executive control. Cognition and Emotion, 30, 325–339. http://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2014.1000830
11.
DennisT. A., ChenC.-C., & McCandlissB. D. (2008). Threat-related attentional biases: An analysis of three attention systems. Depression and Anxiety, 25, E1–E10. http://doi.org/10.1002/da.20308
12.
EriksenB. A., & EriksenC. W. (1974). Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task. Perception & Psychophysics, 16(1), 143–149. http://doi.org/10.3758/BF03203267
13.
EtkinA., EgnerT., PerazaD. M., KandelE. R., & HirschJ. (2006). Resolving emotional conflict: A role for the rostral anterior cingulate cortex in modulating activity in the amygdala. Neuron, 51, 871–882. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2006.07.029
14.
EtkinA., PraterK. E., HoeftF., MenonV., & SchatzbergA. F. (2010). Failure of anterior cingulate activation and connectivity with the amygdala during implicit regulation of emotional processing in generalized anxiety disorder. American Journal of Psychiatry, 167, 545–554. http://dx.doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2009.09070931
15.
FanJ., McCandlissB. D., SommerT., RazA., & PosnerM. I. (2002). Testing the efficiency and independence of attentional networks. Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 14(3), 340–347. http://10.1162/089892902317361886
16.
GallaceA., & SpenceC. (2008). The cognitive and neural correlates of “tactile consciousness”: A multisensory perspective. Consciousness and Cognition, 17, 370–407. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2007.01.005
17.
GallaceA., & SpenceC. (2009). The cognitive and neural correlates of tactile memory. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 380–406. http://doi.org/10.1037/a0015325
18.
GrattonG., ColesM. G. H., & DonchinE. (1992). Optimizing the use of information: Strategic control of activation of responses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 121, 480–506. http://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.121.4.480
19.
HarrisC. R., PashlerH. E., & CoburnP. (2004). Moray revisited: High-priority affective stimuli and visual search. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 57, 1–31. http://doi.org/10.1080/02724980343000107
20.
HasbroucqT., & GuiardY. (1992). The effects of intensity and irrelevant location of a tactile stimulation in a choice reaction time task. Neuropsychologia, 30, 91–94. http://doi.org/10.1016/0028-3932(92)90017-G
21.
HommelB., ProctorR. W., & VuK.-P. L. (2004). A feature-integration account of sequential effects in the Simon task. Psychological Research, 68, 1–17. http://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-003-0132-y
22.
KalanthroffE., CohenN., & HenikA. (2013). Stop feeling: Inhibition of emotional interference following stop-signal trials. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7. http://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00078
KanskeP., & KotzS. A. (2011). Emotion triggers executive attention: Anterior cingulate cortex and amygdala responses to emotional words in a conflict task. Human Brain Mapping, 32, 198–208. http://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.21012
25.
KoppB., RistF., & MattlerU. (1996). N200 in the flanker task as a neurobehavioral tool for investigating executive control. Psychophysiology, 33, 282–294. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.1996.tb00425.x
26.
KronA., SchulY., CohenA., & HassinR. R. (2010). Feelings Don't come easy: Studies on the effortful nature of feelings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 139, 520–534. http://doi.org/10.1037/a0020008
27.
LangP., BradleyM., & CuthbertB. (2001). International Affective Picture System (IAPS): Affective ratings of pictures and instruction manual. Technical report A-5. Gainesville, FL: The Center for Research in Psychophysiology. University of Florida.
28.
LemmensP., CrompvoetsF., BrokkenD., van den EerenbeemdJ., & de VriesG.-J. (2009). A body-conforming tactile jacket to enrich movie viewing. In Third Joint EuroHaptics conference, 2009 and Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems. World Haptics 2009 (pp. 7–12). http://doi.org/10.1109/WHC.2009.4810832
29.
MayrU., AwhE., & LaureyP. (2003). Conflict adaptation effects in the absence of executive control. Nature Neuroscience, 6, 450–452. http://doi.org/10.1038/nn1051
30.
MelcherT., BornC., & GruberO. (2011). How negative affect influences neural control processes underlying the resolution of cognitive interference: An event-related fMRI study. Neuroscience Research, 70, 415–427. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.neures.2011.05.007
31.
MiyakeA., FriedmanN. P., EmersonM. J., WitzkiA. H., HowerterA., & WagerT. D. (2000). The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex “frontal lobe” tasks: A latent variable analysis. Cognitive Psychology, 41, 49–100. http://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1999.0734
32.
MuravenM., & BaumeisterR. F. (2000). Self-regulation and depletion of limited resources: Does self-control resemble a muscle?Psychological Bulletin, 126, 247–259. http://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.126.2.247
33.
NormanD. A., & ShalliceT. (1980). Attention to action: Willed and automatic control of behavior. In DavidsonR., SchwartzR., & ShapiroD. (Eds.), Consciousness and self-regulation: Advances in research and theory IV (pp. 1–18). New York, NY: Plenum Press. doi:10.1007/978-1-4757-0629-1_1
34.
ÖhmanA., FlyktA., & EstevesF. (2001). Emotion drives attention: Detecting the snake in the grass. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130, 466–478. http://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.130.3.466
Okon-SingerH., TzelgovJ., & HenikA. (2007). Distinguishing between automaticity and attention in the processing of emotionally significant stimuli. Emotion, 7, 147–157. http://doi.org/10.1037/1528-3542.7.1.147
PessoaL., KastnerS., & UngerleiderL. G. (2002). Attentional control of the processing of neutral and emotional stimuli. Cognitive Brain Research, 15, 31–45. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0926-6410(02)00214-8
39.
ProctorR. W., & LuC.-H. (1994). Referential coding and attention-shifting accounts of the Simon effect. Psychological Research, 56, 185–195. http://doi.org/10.1007/BF00419706
40.
RidderinkhofK. R. (2002). Activation and suppression in conflict tasks: Empirical clarification through distributional analyses. In PrinzW. & HommelB. (Eds.), Attention and performance; common mechanisms in perception and action (Vol. XIX, pp. 494–519). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Retrieved from http://dare.uva.nl/record/122002
41.
SalzerY., AisenbergD., Oron-GiladT., & HenikA. (2014). In touch with the Simon effect *The first two authors contributed equally. Experimental Psychology, 61, 165–179. http://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000236
42.
SalzerY., Oron-GiladT., & HenikA. (2015). Evaluation of the attention network test using vibrotactile stimulations. Behavior Research Methods, 47, 395–408. http://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-014-0479-6
43.
SchirmerA., TehK. S., WangS., VijayakumarR., ChingA., NithiananthamD., … CheokA. D. (2011). Squeeze me, but Don't tease me: Human and mechanical touch enhance visual attention and emotion discrimination. Social Neuroscience, 6, 219–230. http://doi.org/10.1080/17470919.2010.507958
44.
SchmidtJ. R., & De HouwerJ. (2011). Now you see it, now you Don't: Controlling for contingencies and stimulus repetitions eliminates the Gratton effect. Acta Psychologica, 138, 176–186. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2011.06.002
45.
SchürmannM., GrumbtM., HeideW., & VerlegerR. (2003). Effects of same- and different-modality cues in a Posner task: Extinction-type, spatial, and non-spatial deficits after right-hemispheric stroke. Cognitive Brain Research, 16, 348–358. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0926-6410(02)00303-8
46.
SimonJ. R., & SmallA. M.Jr. (1969). Processing auditory information: Interference from an irrelevant cue. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 53, 433–435.
SoetensE., MaetensK., ZeischkaP., & HenderickxD. (2010). Congruency reversals in an accessory signal Simon task with auditory and visual stimuli. Acta Psychologica, 134, 391–397. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.04.001
49.
SpenceC., NichollsM. E. R., & DriverJ. (2001). The cost of expecting events in the wrong sensory modality. Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 330–336. http://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194473
50.
StroopJ. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 643–662. http://doi.org/10.1037/h0054651
51.
TzelgovJ., HenikA., & BergerJ. (1992). Controlling Stroop effects by manipulating expectations for color words. Memory & Cognition, 20, 727–735. http://doi.org/10.3758/BF03202722
52.
Van DillenL. F., HeslenfeldD. J., & KooleS. L. (2009). Tuning down the emotional brain: An fMRI study of the effects of cognitive load on the processing of affective images. Neuroimage, 45(4), 1212–1219. http://doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.01.016
53.
VuilleumierP. (2005). How brains beware: Neural mechanisms of emotional attention. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9, 585–594. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2005.10.011
54.
WiegandK., & WascherE. (2005). Dynamic aspects of stimulus-response correspondence: Evidence for two mechanisms involved in the Simon effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31, 453–464. http://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.31.3.453
55.
WoodruffP. W., BensonR. R., BandettiniP. A., KwongK. K., HowardR. J., TalavageT., … RosenB. R. (1996). Modulation of auditory and visual cortex by selective attention is modality-dependent. Neuroreport, 7, 1909–1913.
