Tracking the Evil Eye: Trait Anger and Selective Attention Within Ambiguously Hostile Scenes

Overview

Journal J Res Pers

Date 2014 Jun 13

PMID 24920865

Citations 22

Authors

Benjamin M Wilkowski

Michael D Robinson

Robert D Gordon

Wendy Troop-Gordon

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Previous research has shown that trait anger is associated with biases in attention and interpretation, but the temporal relation between these two types of biases remains unresolved. Indeed, two very different models can be derived from the literature. One model proposes that interpretation biases emerge from earlier biases in attention, whereas the other model proposes that hostile interpretations occur quickly, even prior to the allocation of attention to specific cues. Within the context of integrated visual scenes of ambiguously intended harm, the two models make opposite predictions that can be examined using an eye-tracking methodology. The present study ( = 45) therefore tracked participants' allocation of attention to hostile and non-hostile cues in ambiguous visual scenes, and found support for the idea that high anger individuals make early hostile interpretations prior to encoding hostile and non-hostiles cues. The data are important in understanding associations between trait anger and cognitive biases.

Citing Articles

Attributional and attentional patterns in the perception of ambiguous harmful encounters involving peer and authority figures.

Zajenkowska A, Duda E, Lawrence C, Bodecka M Curr Issues Personal Psychol. 2024; 12(3):193-201.

PMID: 39184906 PMC: 11339846. DOI: 10.5114/cipp/166751.

When feeling is for seeing: comparing the effects of motivated perception between fear and anger on ambiguous threatening stimuli.

Graton A, Fezzi H, Le Jeune N Psychol Res. 2023; 88(2):379-388.

PMID: 37682323 DOI: 10.1007/s00426-023-01867-z.

Linking Sleep and Aggression: Examining the Role of Response Inhibition and Emotional Processing.

Bozzay M, Verona E Clin Psychol Sci. 2023; 11(2):271-289.

PMID: 37309522 PMC: 10259845. DOI: 10.1177/21677026221100235.

Hostility bias or sadness bias in excluded individuals: does anodal transcranial direct current stimulation of right VLPFC vs. left DLPFC have a mitigating effect?.

Rajchert J, Zajenkowska A, Nowakowska I, Bodecka-Zych M, Abramiuk A Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2022; 22(5):1063-1077.

PMID: 35474567 DOI: 10.3758/s13415-022-01008-w.

CBM-I Training and Its Effect on Interpretations of Intent, Facial Expressions, Attention and Aggressive Behavior.

AlMoghrabi N, Franken I, Mayer B, van der Schoot M, Huijding J Eur J Psychol. 2022; 17(2):13-27.

PMID: 35136426 PMC: 8768478. DOI: 10.5964/ejop.2413.

References

Crick N, Nelson D . Relational and physical victimization within friendships: nobody told me there'd be friends like these. J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2002; 30(6):599-607. DOI: 10.1023/a:1020811714064. View

Venturino M, Gagnon D . Information tradeoffs in complex stimulus structure: local and global levels in naturalistic scenes. Percept Psychophys. 1992; 52(4):425-36. DOI: 10.3758/bf03206702. View

De Graef P, De Troy A, dYdewalle G . Local and global contextual constraints on the identification of objects in scenes. Can J Psychol. 1992; 46(3):489-508. DOI: 10.1037/h0084324. View

Gilbert D, Malone P . The correspondence bias. Psychol Bull. 1995; 117(1):21-38. DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.117.1.21. View

Loftus G, MACKWORTH N . Cognitive determinants of fixation location during picture viewing. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1978; 4(4):565-72. DOI: 10.1037//0096-1523.4.4.565. View

Davenport J, Potter M . Scene consistency in object and background perception. Psychol Sci. 2004; 15(8):559-64. DOI: 10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00719.x. View

Hudley C, Graham S . An attributional intervention to reduce peer-directed aggression among African-American boys. Child Dev. 1993; 64(1):124-38. View

Dodge K . Social cognition and children's aggressive behavior. Child Dev. 1980; 51(1):162-70. View

BUSS A, Perry M . The aggression questionnaire. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1992; 63(3):452-9. DOI: 10.1037//0022-3514.63.3.452. View

10.

Fox E, Russo R, Bowles R, Dutton K . Do threatening stimuli draw or hold visual attention in subclinical anxiety?. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2002; 130(4):681-700. PMC: 1924776. View

11.

Winter L, Uleman J . When are social judgments made? Evidence for the spontaneousness of trait inferences. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1984; 47(2):237-52. DOI: 10.1037//0022-3514.47.2.237. View

12.

Zwaan R, Radvansky G . Situation models in language comprehension and memory. Psychol Bull. 1998; 123(2):162-85. DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.123.2.162. View

13.

Mikulincer M . Adult attachment style and individual differences in functional versus dysfunctional experiences of anger. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1998; 74(2):513-24. DOI: 10.1037//0022-3514.74.2.513. View

14.

Dodge K, Newman J . Biased decision-making processes in aggressive boys. J Abnorm Psychol. 1981; 90(4):375-9. DOI: 10.1037//0021-843x.90.4.375. View

15.

Vanrullen R, Thorpe S . The time course of visual processing: from early perception to decision-making. J Cogn Neurosci. 2001; 13(4):454-61. DOI: 10.1162/08989290152001880. View

16.

Wingrove J, Bond A . Correlation between trait hostility and faster reading times for sentences describing angry reactions to ambiguous situations. Cogn Emot. 2012; 19(3):463-72. DOI: 10.1080/02699930441000229. View

17.

Martin R, WATSON D, Wan C . A three-factor model of trait anger: dimensions of affect, behavior, and cognition. J Pers. 2000; 68(5):869-97. DOI: 10.1111/1467-6494.00119. View

18.

Henderson J, Hollingworth A . High-level scene perception. Annu Rev Psychol. 1999; 50:243-71. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.psych.50.1.243. View

19.

Gordon R . Selective attention during scene perception: evidence from negative priming. Mem Cognit. 2007; 34(7):1484-94. DOI: 10.3758/bf03195913. View

20.

De Graef P, Christiaens D, dYdewalle G . Perceptual effects of scene context on object identification. Psychol Res. 1990; 52(4):317-29. DOI: 10.1007/BF00868064. View