Attending to affect: appraisal strategies modulate the electrocortical response to arousing pictures
Abstract
Arousing (unpleasant and pleasant) pictures elicit increased neurophysiological measures of perceptual processing. In particular, the electrocortical late positive potential (LPP) is enhanced for arousing, compared with neutral, pictures. To determine whether the magnitude of the LPP is sensitive to the way stimuli are appraised, 16 participants viewed both pleasant and unpleasant pictures and categorized them along an affective or nonaffective dimension. Results indicate that the LPP was reduced for both pleasant and unpleasant pictures when participants made nonaffective, compared with affective, judgments. These results are consistent with previous studies that have used functional neuroimaging to investigate the role of appraisal on emotional processing. The results are further discussed in terms of the utility of using the LPP to study emotion regulation.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The LPP has been hypothesised to index perceptual processing in the visual cortex that is facilitated or amplified by amygdala-activity.
“The LPP has been hypothesised to index perceptual processing in the visual cortex that is facilitated or amplified by amygdala-activity (Bradley et al., 2003; Hajcak et al., 2006).”
From Error and feedback processing in children with ADHD and children with Autistic Spectrum Disorder: An EEG event-related potential study (2008) · cites this paper as Hajcak et al., 2006
The LPP is elicited by highly arousing pleasant and unpleasant pictures and is thought to reflect increased attention to affective-motivational stimuli.
“The LPP is elicited by highly arousing pleasant and unpleasant pictures and is thought to reflect increased attention to affective-motivational stimuli (Cuthbert et al., 2000; Hajcak et al., 2006; Schupp et al., 2000)”
From Error and feedback processing in children with ADHD and children with Autistic Spectrum Disorder: An EEG event-related potential study (2008) · cites this paper as Hajcak et al., 2006
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 30 · Cited by 273
- Authors
- Hajcak, G., Moser, J. S., & Simons, R. F.
- Affiliations
- University of Delaware (US)
- Venue
- Emotion
- Published
- 2006
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 517-522
- ISSN
- 1528-3542 (ISSN-L)
- 1931-1516
- OpenAlex
- W1978137729
- Cited by
- 273
- References
- 30
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 18
- FWCI
- 4.05
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Emotion (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute of Mental Health (MH069047)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Aesthetic Perception and Analysis
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
- Keywords
- late positive potential, affective judgment, emotional arousal, emotional pictures, electrocortical responses, emotion regulation, perceptual processing
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Affect, Amygdala, Arousal, Attention, Awareness, Brain Mapping, Cerebral Cortex, Cognition, Decision Making, Electroencephalography, Evoked Potentials, Visual, Female, Humans, Internal-External Control, Judgment, Male, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Reaction Time, Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted, Visual Cortex
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
