» Articles » PMID: 35616712

Emotions in Motion: Affective Valence Can Influence Compatibility Effects with Graspable Objects

Overview
Journal Psychol Res
Specialty Psychology
Date 2022 May 26
PMID 35616712
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Previous studies showed that affective valence (positive, negative) influences Stimulus-Response Compatibility (SRC) effects elicited by both relevant and irrelevant spatial dimensions. We tested whether valence influences SRC effects when the irrelevant spatial dimension rather than being conveyed by the entire stimulus location is conveyed by the location of the stimulus' graspable part, i.e., the Handle-Response (H-R) compatibility effect. Participants saw objects with either a flower, a spider or nothing on their handle and categorized them as kitchen utensils or garage tools through button presses. In Experiment 1, a random presentation of valenced stimuli was used, whereas in Experiment 2 differently valenced stimuli were arranged in different blocks. Furthermore, participants in Experiment 2 could be spider-fearful or not. In Experiment 1, an H-R compatibility effect occurred for response latencies, regardless of whether stimuli presented a negative, positive or no element on their handle. In Experiment 2 the effect occurred only when a positive element was shown on the object's handle. In addition, spider-fearful individuals showed significantly slower responses when the element appearing on the object's handle had a negative valence. These results suggest that the SRC effect observed with pictures of graspable objects may be sensitive to the affective characteristics of stimuli and that approach/avoidance response tendencies may also depend on individual differences (being spider-fearful or not).

Citing Articles

Similarity judgements: the comparison of normative predictions and subjective evaluations - A study of the ratio model of similarity in social context.

Jablonska M, Falkowski A, Mackiewicz R Front Psychol. 2024; 15:1335707.

PMID: 38817837 PMC: 11139025. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1335707.


Bound to a spider without its web: Task-type modulates the retrieval of affective information in subsequent responses.

Schopper L, Jerusalem A, Lotzke L, Frings C Atten Percept Psychophys. 2023; 85(8):2655-2672.

PMID: 37853167 PMC: 10600052. DOI: 10.3758/s13414-023-02791-5.


Compatibility effects with destination and origin of motion.

Scerrati E, Nicoletti R, Rubichi S, Scorolli C, Lugli L PLoS One. 2023; 18(2):e0281829.

PMID: 36800378 PMC: 9937485. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0281829.


Restricting movements of lower face leaves recognition of emotional vocalizations intact but introduces a valence positivity bias.

Woloszyn K, Hohol M, Kuniecki M, Winkielman P Sci Rep. 2022; 12(1):16101.

PMID: 36167865 PMC: 9515079. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-18888-0.


Does a look of fear prompt to act? The effects of gaze and face emotional expression on manipulable objects.

Scerrati E, Rubichi S, Iani C Front Psychol. 2022; 13:927104.

PMID: 36118466 PMC: 9480825. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.927104.

References
1.
Anelli F, Borghi A, Nicoletti R . Grasping the pain: motor resonance with dangerous affordances. Conscious Cogn. 2012; 21(4):1627-39. DOI: 10.1016/j.concog.2012.09.001. View

2.
Anelli F, Nicoletti R, Bolzani R, Borghi A . Keep away from danger: dangerous objects in dynamic and static situations. Front Hum Neurosci. 2013; 7:344. PMC: 3698464. DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00344. View

3.
Anwyl-Irvine A, Massonnie J, Flitton A, Kirkham N, Evershed J . Gorilla in our midst: An online behavioral experiment builder. Behav Res Methods. 2019; 52(1):388-407. PMC: 7005094. DOI: 10.3758/s13428-019-01237-x. View

4.
Bradley M, Codispoti M, Cuthbert B, Lang P . Emotion and motivation I: defensive and appetitive reactions in picture processing. Emotion. 2003; 1(3):276-98. View

5.
Buccino G, Sato M, Cattaneo L, Roda F, Riggio L . Broken affordances, broken objects: a TMS study. Neuropsychologia. 2009; 47(14):3074-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2009.07.003. View