THE EFFECT OF PREDICTIVE CUEING ON THE CAPTURE OF ATTENTION BY

EMOTIONAL STIMULI.
Javier de Echegaray, Oliver Stegmann, Christian Koblitz, Daria Sitokhina.

INTRODUCTION METHODS
Fig. 1

Our brain prioritizes processing emotional content, amplifying it over neutral content, which has been demonstrated
in many studies (ex. Bekhtereva, V., Craddock, M., Gundlach, C., & Müller, M. M., 2019). However, it remains
unclear whether we can cognitively control the sensory gain amplification during attentional capture.
Here, we investigate how prior knowledge of emotional content (provided by a predictive cue informing participants
about the emotional valence of the upcoming stimuli) influences the attentional allocation between the foreground
RDK task and the background RSVP stream of emotionally charged stimuli (pleasant, unpleasant, neutral).
We hypothesize that
Participants: 30 subjects (24 female, 6 male, Age: M = 22.4 ±3).
Participants performed a foreground task, detecting and responding to
coherent motion events within a flickering random dot kinematogram
(RDK) at a frequency of 17.8 Hz, while passively viewing a Rapid Serial
Visual Presentation (RSVP) paradigm at 4 Hz. The images, selected
from the International Affective Picture System (IAPS), varied in valence
but not in arousal dimension (Fig. 2). Transitions from scrambled to Fig 1. illustrates the example of image transitions from intact to scrambled form.

intact forms were made (Fig. 1). Before the each trial a predictive cue Fig. 2
1. If the brain is capable of cognitively suppressing the RSVP stream to avoid confrontation with unpleasant stimuli, was introduced, informing about the valence of upcoming stimuli (N, P,
this will manifest as decreased response (SSVEPs amplitudes) to unpleasant stimuli and improved performance U) (Fig. 3).
on the foreground RDK task.
SSVEPs (Frequency-taggled Steady-State Visual Evoked Potentials)
2. On the other hand, the response to pleasant stimuli is expected to increase during the expectation period, were recorded using EEG and subsequently analyzed. At the end of the
reflecting enhanced attentional engagement with these stimuli. experiment, participants rated the pictures on the dimensions of
3. If cognitive control over emotional processing of content is not possible, then the results will be consistent with affective arousal and valence using the 9-point Self Assessment-
those of previous studies. Manikin (SAM) scale.

Fig 2. illustrates the SAM rating scores for valence & arousal (respectively) for each emotional condition.

RESULTS
Fig. 3
RSVPs. Paired T-Test found highly significant difference between the Post-Cue Interval and the Baseline in neutral (F(29)
= -3.0017; p < 0.01), pleasant (F(29) = -3.3746; p < 0.01) and unpleasant (F(29) = -2.9586; p < 0.01) emotional categorys.
We could also find significant difference over the LongTerm-Interval and the Baseline in neutral (F(29) = -2.3885; p <
0.05), pleasant (F(29) = -3.2734; p < 0.01) and unpleasant (F(29) = -2.7939; p < 0.01) categorys. Within the Post-Cue and
LongTerm Intervals we could find significant difference between pleasant and neutral (Post: F(29) = -3.3422; p < 0.01/
Long: F(29) = -3.66; p < 0.01) and between pleasant and unpleasant (F(29) = 2.8134; p < 0.05) in the LongTerm-Interval.
RDKs. There is no significant differences between the Baseline and Post-Cue Interval or the LongTerm-Interval.
Behavioral Detection Task. We did not find significant difference between neutral, pleasant and unpleasant in -1500ms,
500ms, 750ms and 1000ms (all p < 0.01). For neutral and pleasant we found significant difference at 500ms (p < 0.05) and
750ms (p < 0.01). The rest were not significant.

Fig. 4b
Fig. 4e
Fig. 4a

4Hz - RSVP

Fig. 4c Fig. 4f

17.75Hz - RDK

Fig. 4d Fig. 4g

RSVP

3. illustrates the experimental trial.

4.a. & b. & c. illustrates the SSVEP time-course of the averaged signal at the frequency of interest (4 Hz), recorded by the
relevant electrodes illustrated in figure 2.a. , depicting the change in the amplitude from scrambled-to-concrete change in **
RSVP streams for each emotional category ** **
**
4.d. illustrates the Hit-Rate of the participants and shows the percentage they reacted to the correct behavioral detection task.
4.e.&f. shows the topography of the 4 Hz SSVEP response to the 4 Hz RSVP stimulation.
4.g. depicts the Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) EEG values of the collapsed conditions, with a main peak at the stimulation RDK

frequency (4 Hz) and the subsequent harmonics at 8,12 and 17,75 Hz.
p < 0.05*, p < 0.01**, p < 0.001***

DISCUSSION

In the RSVP, our primary finding showcases distinct response amplitudes: Pleasant > Unpleasant = Neutral. This deviation from
our previous study, featuring a similar design but lacking cues, where we identified Pleasant = Unpleasant > Neutral, an effect
attributed to the arousal induced by the stimuli. In both studies, the only discriminator between pleasant and unpleasant stimuli is
their valence (see Methods/Fig.2). Given that the cue emerges as the most evident and substantial distinction between the
studies, it is reasonable to infer that these amplitude differences arise directly from the cue's presence. Consequently, we
suggest that the cue elicits some form of anticipation or preparatory mechanism, enabling participants to actively suppress the
impact of unpleasant stimuli.
Upon transitioning from scrambled to Semantic Pictures, our prediction was a biphasic response from the RDKs, indicating a
delayed response compared to the RSVPs. Although we expected a mirrored amplitude from the RSVPs (Pleasant < Unpleasant
= Neutral), this effect was not observed. We acknowledge that a lack of statistical power may have contributed to this result,
underscoring the need for further investigation.
References
1. Bekhtereva, V., Craddock, M., Gundlach, C., & Müller, M. M. (2019). Rapid sensory gain with emotional
distracters precedes attentional deployment from a foreground task. Neuroimage, 202,
116115.doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.116115
2. Bekhtereva, V., Pritschmann, R., Keil, A., & Muller, M. M. (2018). The neural signature of extracting
emotional content from rapid visual streams at multiple presentation rates: A cross-laboratory study.
Psychophysiology, 55(12), e13222. doi:10.1111/psyp.13222.
3. Vuilleumier, Patrik. (2006). Vuilleumier P. How brains beware: neural mechanisms of emotional attention.
Trends Cogn Sci 9: 585-594. Trends in cognitive sciences. 9. 585-94. 10.1016/j.tics.2005.10.011.

On a behavioral level, the primary effect observed in the RDKs—lower amplitude post-transition—correlated with reduced
accuracy in event detection. This suggests a connection between amplitude and participant attention, echoing findings from
previous studies.

In summary, our results demonstrate the significant role of cues in shaping response amplitudes. The cue modifies not only the
response based on the valence of the stimuli but also implies a preparatory mechanism. This provides insights into the cognitive
processes involved in mitigating the impact of stimuli, particularly in the realm of emotional processing.

INTERNAL