The Library

Freeze or flee? : negative stimuli elicit selective responding

Tools

Estes, Zachary, 1973- and Verges, Michelle. (2008) Freeze or flee? : negative stimuli elicit selective responding. Cognition, Vol.108 (No.2). pp. 557-565. ISSN 0010-0277

Text
WRAP_Estes_Estes_Verges.doc
Download (77Kb)

Preview

Text
WRAP_Estes_Estes_Verges.pdf
Download (61Kb)

Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2008.03.003

Abstract

Humans preferentially attend to negative stimuli. A consequence of this automatic vigilance for negative valence is that negative words elicit slower responses than neutral or positive words on a host of cognitive tasks. Some researchers have speculated that negative stimuli elicit a general suppression of motor activity, akin to the freezing response exhibited by animals under threat. Alternatively, we suggest that negative stimuli only elicit slowed responding on tasks for which stimulus valence is irrelevant for responding. To discriminate between these motor suppression and response-relevance hypotheses, we elicited both lexical decisions and valence judgments of negative words and positive words. Relative to positive words (e.g., kitten), negative words (e.g., spider) elicited slower lexical decisions but faster valence judgments. Results therefore indicate that negative stimuli do not cause a generalized motor suppression. Rather, negative stimuli elicit selective responding, with faster responses on tasks for which stimulus valence is response-relevant.

Item Type:	Journal Article
Subjects:	B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > BF Psychology
Divisions:	Faculty of Science > Psychology
Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH):	Adversive stimuli, Reflexes
Journal or Publication Title:	Cognition
Publisher:	Elsevier
ISSN:	0010-0277
Date:	22 April 2008
Volume:	Vol.108
Number:	No.2
Page Range:	pp. 557-565
Identification Number:	10.1016/j.cognition.2008.03.003
Status:	Peer Reviewed
Access rights to Published version:	Open Access
Description:	Version accepted by publisher (post-print, after peer review, before copy-editing)
References:	Algom, D., Chajut, E., & Lev, S. (2004). A rational look at the emotional Stroop phenomenon: a generic slowdown, not a Stroop effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, pp.323-338. Balota, D. A., Cortese, M. J., Sergent-Marshall, S. D., Spieler, D. H., & Yap, M. J. (2004). Visual word recognition of single-syllable words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, pp.283-316. Bradbury, J. W., & Vehrencamp, S. L. (1998). Principles of Animal Communication. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer. Bradley, M. M. & Lang, P. J. (1999). Affective norms for English words (ANEW): instruction manual and affective ratings. Technical Report C-1, The Center for Research in Psychophysiology, University of Florida. Constantine, R., McNally, R. J., & Hornig, C. D. (2001). Snake fear and the pictorial emotional Stroop paradigm. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 25, pp.757-764. Di Blanco, Y., & Hirsch, B. T. (2006). Determinants of vigilance behavior in the ring-tailed coati (Nasua nasua): the importance of within-group spatial position. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 61, pp.173-182. Estes, Z. & Adelman, J. S. (in press). Automatic vigilance for negative words in lexical decision and naming: comment on Larsen, Mercer, and Balota (2006). Emotion. Fazio, R. H. (2001). On the automatic activation of associated evaluations: an overview. Cognition & Emotion, 15, pp.115-141. Ferrari, S. F., & Lopes Ferrari, M. A. (1990). Predator avoidance behaviour in the buffy-headed marmoset, Callithrix flaviceps. Primates, 31, pp.323-338. Fox, E., Russo, R., Bowles, R., & Dutton, K. (2001). Do threatening stimuli draw or hold visual attention in subclinical anxiety? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130, pp.681-700. Huijding, J., & de Jong, P. J. (2005). A pictorial version of the Extrinsic Affective Simon Task: sensitivity to generally affective and phobia-relevant stimuli in high and low spider fearful individuals. Experimental Psychology, 52, pp.289-295. Ito, T. A., Larsen, J. T., Smith, N. K., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1998). Negative information weighs more heavily on the brain: the negativity bias in evaluative categorizations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, pp.887-900. Kindt, M. & Brosschot, J. F. (1997). Phobia related cognitive bias for pictorial and linguistic stimuli. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 106, pp.644-648. Lazarus, R. S. (1982). Thoughts on the relationship between emotion and cognition. American Psychologist, 37, pp.1019-1024. Leavesely, A. J., & Magrath, R. D. (2005). Communicating about danger: urgency alarm calling in a bird. Animal Behaviour, 70, pp.365-373. Manser, M. B., Seyfarth, R. M., & Cheney, D. L. (2002). Suricate alarm calls signal predator class and urgency. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6, pp.55-57. McKenna, F. P., & Sharma, D. (1995). Intrusive cognitions: an investigation of the emotional Stroop task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, pp.1595-1607. McKenna, F. P., & Sharma, D. (2004). Reversing the emotional Stroop effect reveals that it is not what it seems: the role of fast and slow components. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, pp.382-392. Most, S. B., Chun, M. M., Widders, D. M., & Zald, D. H. (2005). Attentional rubbernecking: cognitive control and personality in emotion-induced blindness. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, pp.654-661. Neumann, R., Forster, J. & Strack, F. (2003). Motor compatibility: the bidirectional link between behavior and evaluation. In J. Musch & K. C. Klauer (Eds.), The Psychology of Evaluation (pp. 371-391). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Pratto, F. & John, O. P. (1991). Automatic vigilance: the attention-grabbing power of negative social information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, pp.380-391. Searcy, Y. M., & Caine, N. G. (2003). Hawk calls elicit alarm and defensive reactions in captive Geoffroy’s marmosets (Callithrix geoffroyi). Folia Primatologica, 74, pp.115-125. Seyfarth, R. M., & Cheney, D. L. (2003). Signalers and receivers in animal communication. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, pp.145-173. Smith, N. K., Cacioppo, J. T., Larsen, J. T., & Chartrand, T. L. (2003). May I have your attention, please: electrocortical responses to positive and negative stimuli. Neuropsychologia, 41, pp.171-183. Taylor, S. E. (1991). Asymmetrical effects of positive and negative events: the mobilization-minimization hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin, 110, pp.67-85. Tipples, J., & Sharma, D. (2000). Orienting to exogenous cues and attentional bias to affective pictures reflect separate processes. British Journal of Psychology, 91, pp.87-97. Wentura, D., Rothermund, K., & Bak, P. (2000). Automatic vigilance: the attention-grabbing power of approach- and avoidance-related social information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, pp.1024-1037. Williams, J. M. G., Mathews, A., & MacLeod, C. (1996). The emotional Stroop task and psychopathology. Psychological Bulletin, 120, pp.3-24. Yiend, J., & Mathews, A. (2001). Anxiety and attention to threatening pictures. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54A, pp.665-681. Zajonc, R. B. (1980). Feeling and thinking: preferences need no inferences. American Psychologist, 35, pp.151-175. Zuberbuhler, K., Noe, R., & Seyfarth, R. M. (1997). Diana monkey long distance calls: messages for conspecifics and predators. Animal Behaviour, 53, pp.589-604.
URI:	http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/id/eprint/76