情绪显著性对情绪诱发视盲的影响

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2023.01806

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

情绪诱发视盲是指一个与任务无关的情绪性刺激的呈现吸引了个体注意, 以至于对快速呈现的靶刺激“视而不见”。研究采用RSVP范式, 考察不相似背景条件和相似背景条件下情绪干扰物的物理显著性和情绪显著性对情绪诱发视盲的影响。在不相似背景条件下, 关键干扰物与填充刺激存在显著差异; 在相似背景条件下, 关键干扰物与填充刺激无显著差异。实验1比较两组背景条件下情绪诱发视盲的差异。结果显示不相似背景条件下情绪诱发视盲效应出现; 相似背景条件下情绪诱发视盲效应消失。实验2在关键干扰物图片上新增红色矩形边框后比较两组背景条件下情绪诱发视盲的差异。结果显示个体注意到干扰物的情绪显著性对情绪诱发视盲有显著影响, 在相似背景条件下, 一旦对负性干扰物进行提示就出现情绪诱发视盲效应。结果表明, 情绪诱发视盲的产生不仅与干扰刺激吸引的注意资源的多少有关, 还与个体初始投入的注意资源的多少有关。

关键词: 情绪诱发视盲, 物理显著性, 情绪显著性, 线索提示

Abstract:

In most visual scenes, the visual system cannot process all the information simultaneously; instead, it processes certain information first. Emotional stimuli are more likely to attract the attention of the visual system than non-emotional stimuli. However, it may be challenging to suppress the attention gained by emotional stimuli (though such a stimulus is irrelevant), and it may result in Emotion-induced Blindness (EiB), whereby the presence of an emotional stimulus fails to correlate with a task that attracts an individual’s attention. Therefore, individuals become “blinded” to a rapidly presented target stimulus.
The present study investigated the effects of physical and emotional salience of emotional distractors on EiB under different background conditions using the rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) paradigm. This study used a three-factor design in which background conditions (similar vs. dissimilar), disturbance types (negative vs. neutral vs. baseline), and Lag (Lag 2 vs. Lag 8) were all within-participant variables. The dependent variable was the accuracy of the target judgment. This study consisted of three main phases. First, we applied a 2.5 cm × 2.5 cm (500 ms) black “+” fixation point with 0.39× 0.39 degrees a visual angle (DVA) that appeared in the center of the screen followed by an RSVP stimulus stream consisting of 15 images (100 ms each). Key disturbance images appeared randomly at several positions, ranging from four to six, in the stimulus stream. The baseline disturbances were selected from the same set of background images. The target stimulus appeared at either position 2 (Lag 2) or position 8 (Lag 8) following the presentation of the disturbance stimulus. At the end of each sequence, participants were instructed to answer whether the target stimulus was rotated to the left or right by pressing the “F” or “J” keys.
The study utilized a repeated-measures ANOVA to analyze the impact of background conditions (similar vs. dissimilar), Lag (Lag 2 vs. Lag 8), and type of distractor (negative vs. neutral vs. baseline) on the correct rate of target identification by the study participants. Experiment 1 showed that EiB occurred under different background conditions but disappeared under similar background conditions. Experiment 2 compared the differences in EiB between the two groups under background conditions after adding a red rectangular border to the key distractor pictures. In Experiment 2, EiB occurred under dissimilar background conditions for both negative and neutral conditions, which is consistent with the findings of Experiment 1. However, the magnitude of the EiB was much greater in Experiment 2 (25%) than in Experiment 1 (17%). Additionally, under similar background conditions, the EiB produced by negative pictures was significantly larger than in Experiment 1 (10% vs. 3%). We also noted that individual notice of the emotional salience of the distractors had a significant effect on EiB, which was restored once cued to negative distractors under similar background conditions.
In summary, the EiB phenomenon is driven by the physical salience of emotional distractors, rather than emotional salience. Additionally, the current findings showed that EiB was related to the attentional resources associated with distractor stimuli; in other words, the more attentional resources attracted by distractor stimuli, the more likely the occurrence of EiB. The number of attentional resources attracted by distractor stimuli was related to the difference in stimulus attributes and the number of attentional resources initially invested.

Key words: emotion-induced blindness, physical salience, emotion salience, cue

中图分类号:

B842

邱慧燕, 吕勇. (2023). 情绪显著性对情绪诱发视盲的影响. 心理学报, 55(11), 1806-1814.

QIU Huiyan, LYU Yong. (2023). The effects of emotional salience on emotion-induced blindness. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 55(11), 1806-1814.

图/表 4

图1 实验1流程图注: 每种背景条件下Lag的两种水平和干扰物的三种类型的组合进行混合随机呈现, 同时背景条件呈现的先后顺序进行了被试间平衡。

图2 在不相似(左图2a)和相似(右图2b)背景条件下, 不同干扰物类型的目标正确率注: 误差线为均值的标准误

图3 实验2流程图注: 红色矩形边框是为了提示被试注意关键干扰物图片。

图4 在不相似(左图4a)和相似(右图4b)背景条件下, 不同干扰物类型的目标正确率注: 误差线为均值的标准误

参考文献 29

[1]	Anderson B. A., Laurent P. A., & Yantis S. (2011). Value-driven attentional capture. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(25), 10367−10371. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1104047108
[2]	Awh E., Belopolsky A. V., & Theeuwes J. (2012). Top-down versus bottom-up attentional control: A failed theoretical dichotomy. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16(8), 437−443. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2012.06.010
[3]	Bainbridge W. A., & Oliva A. (2015). A toolbox and sample object perception data for equalization of natural images. Data in Brief, 5, 846−851. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib. 2015.10.030
[4]	Baker A. L., Kim M., & Hoffman J. E. (2021). Searching for emotional salience. Cognition, 214, 104730. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104730 doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104730 URL
[5]	Cohen J. (2013). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Routledge.
[6]	Faul F., Erdfelder E., Buchner A., & Lang A.-G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 1149−1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM. 41.4.1149
[7]	Guilbert D., Most S. B., & Curby K. M. (2020). Real world familiarity does not reduce susceptibility to emotional disruption of perception: Evidence from two temporal attention tasks. Cognition and Emotion, 34(3), 450−461. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2019.1637333
[8]	Hansen B. C., & Loschky L. C. (2013). The contribution of amplitude and phase spectra-defined scene statistics to the masking of rapid scene categorization. Journal of Vision, 13(13), 21−21. https://doi.org/10.1167/13.13.21
[9]	Hoffman J. E., Kim M., Taylor M., & Holiday K. (2020). Emotional capture during emotion-induced blindness is not automatic. Cortex, 122, 140−158. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.cortex.2019.03.013
[10]	Itti L., & Koch C. (2001). Computational modelling of visual attention. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 2(3), 194−203. https://doi.org/10.1038/35058500
[11]	Kennedy B. L., Huang R., & Mather M. (2020). Age differences in emotion-induced blindness: Positivity effects in early attention. Emotion, 20(7), 1266−1278. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000643
[12]	Kennedy B. L., & Most S. B. (2013). The role of distractors’ categorical distinctiveness in emotion-induced blindness. Journal of Vision, 13(9), 1135−1135. https://doi.org/ 10.1167/13.9.1135
[13]	Kennedy B. L., & Most S. B. (2015a). The rapid perceptual impact of emotional distractors. PLoS One, 10(6), e0129320. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0129320 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0129320 URL
[14]	Kennedy B. L., & Most S. B. (2015b). Affective stimuli capture attention regardless of categorical distinctiveness: an emotion-induced blindness study. Visual Cognition, 23(1-2), 105−117. https://doi.org/10.1080/13506285.2015. 1024300 doi: 10.1080/13506285.2014.980483 URL
[15]	Kennedy B. L., Pearson D., Sutton D. J., Beesley T., & Most S. B. (2018). Spatiotemporal competition and task-relevance shape the spatial distribution of emotional interference during rapid visual processing: Evidence from gaze- contingent eye-tracking. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 80(2), 426−438. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-017−1448−9
[16]	Kennedy B. L., Rawding J., Most S. B., & Hoffman J. E. (2014). Emotion-induced blindness reflects competition at early and late processing stages: An ERP study. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 14(4), 1485−1498. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-014-0303-x
[17]	Lang P. J., Bradley M. M., & Cuthbert B. N. (2001). International Affective Picture System (IAPS): Instruction manual and affective ratings. Gainesville: University of Florida, Center for Research in Psychophysiology.
[18]	Lyu Y., Zhang W. N., & Shen D. L. (2010). Subliminal affective priming effect by faces with different valence: An ERP study. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 42(9), 929−938.
	[吕勇, 张伟娜, 沈德立(2010). 不同愉悦度面孔阈下情绪启动效应: 来自ERP的证据. 心理学报, 42(9), 929−938 ]
[19]	McHugo M., Olatunji B. O., & Zald D. H. (2013). The emotional attentional blink: What we know so far. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7, 151−159. https://doi. org/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00151
[20]	Most S. B., Boettcher S., & Hoffman J. E. (2013). The role of feature salience in emotion-induced blindness. Journal of Vision, 13(9), 904−904. https://doi.org/10.1167/13.9.904
[21]	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(4), 654−661. https://doi.org/10. 3758/bf03196754
[22]	Nieuwenstein M., van der Burg E., Theeuwes J., Wyble B., & Potter M. (2009). Temporal constraints on conscious vision: On the ubiquitous nature of the attentional blink. Journal of Vision, 9(9), 18. https://doi.org/10.1167/9.9.18
[23]	Öhman A., Flykt A., & Esteves F. (2001). Emotion drives attention: Detecting the snake in the grass. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130(3), 466−478. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.130.3.466
[24]	Pessoa L., McKenna M., Gutierrez E., & Ungerleider L. G. (2002). Neural processing of emotional faces requires attention. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 99(17), 11458−11463. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.172403899
[25]	Proud M., Goodhew S. C., & Edwards M. (2020). A vigilance avoidance account of spatial selectivity in dual-stream emotion induced blindness. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 27(2), 322−329. https://doi.org/10. 3758/s13423-019-01690-x
[26]	Storbeck J., Dayboch J., & Wylie J. (2019). Fear and happiness, but not sadness, motivate attentional flexibility: A case for emotion influencing the ability to split foci of attention. Emotion, 19(4), 655−664. https://doi.org/10. 1037/emo0000471
[27]	Theeuwes J. (2010). Top-down and bottom-up control of visual selection. Acta Psychologica, 135(2), 77−99. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.02.006
[28]	Treisman A., & Souther J. (1985). Search asymmetry: A diagnostic for preattentive processing of separable features. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 114(3), 285−310. https://doi.org/10.1037//0096-3445.114.3.285
[29]	Vuilleumier P., Armony J. L., Driver J., & Dolan R. J. (2001). Effects of attention and emotion on face processing in the human brain: An event-related fMRI study. Neuron, 30(3), 829−841. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0896−6273(01) 00328−2