Cited by 160Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesNeurobiology of Language and BilingualismNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior

The influence of emotional interference on cognitive control: A meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies using the emotional Stroop task

Open access
Song, Sensen, Zilverstand, Anna, Song, Hongwen, d’Oleire Uquillas, Federico, Wang, Yongming, Xie, Chao, Cheng, Li, Zou, Zhiling·2017·Scientific Reports

Abstract

The neural correlates underlying the influence of emotional interference on cognitive control remain a topic of discussion. Here, we assessed 16 neuroimaging studies that used an emotional Stroop task and that reported a significant interaction effect between emotion (stimulus type) and cognitive conflict. There were a total of 330 participants, equaling 132 foci for an activation likelihood estimation (ALE) analysis. Results revealed consistent brain activation patterns related to emotionally-salient stimuli (as compared to emotionally-neutral trials) during cognitive conflict trials [incongruent trials (with task-irrelevant information interfering), versus congruent/baseline trials (less disturbance from task-irrelevant information)], that span the lateral prefrontal cortex (dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and inferior frontal gyrus), the medial prefrontal cortex, and the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex. Comparing mild emotional interference trials (without semantic conflict) versus intense emotional interference trials (with semantic conflict), revealed that while concurrent activation in similar brain regions as mentioned above was found for intense emotional interference trials, activation for mild emotional interference trials was only found in the precentral/postcentral gyrus. These data provide evidence for the potential neural mechanisms underlying emotional interference on cognitive control, and further elucidate an important distinction in brain activation patterns for different levels of emotional conflict across emotional Stroop tasks.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41598-017-02266-2

Cites

71 of 71 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Hot cognitive control shows some dissociations from cool cognitive control.

    “Many PFC areas are particularly associated with control over emotionally relevant information (hot CC) [60–64, 66], which, as discussed earlier, show some dissociations from cool CC.”

    From The role of prefrontal cortex in cognitive control and executive function (2022) · cites this paper as [63]

    The Discussion reports prefrontal activation during cognitive control with emotional interference, supporting the sentence’s association of PFC regions with emotionally relevant control. It also describes regions shared with classic, non-emotional Stroop control, but does not establish a direct hot-versus-cool dissociation; its reported differences compare emotional-interference conditions. (LLM, conf=0.79)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Many prefrontal cortex areas are particularly associated with control over emotionally relevant information (hot cognitive control).

    “Many PFC areas are particularly associated with control over emotionally relevant information (hot CC) [60–64, 66], which, as discussed earlier, show some dissociations from cool CC.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Song, S., Zilverstand, A., Song, H., d’Oleire Uquillas, F., Wang, Y., Xie, C., Cheng, L., & Zou, Z.
Affiliations
  • Southwest University (CN)
  • Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (US)
  • University of Science and Technology of China (CN)
  • Chinese Academy of Sciences (CN)
Corresponding author
Zou, Zhiling
Venue
Scientific Reports
Published
2017-05-18
Volume
7
Issue
1
Pages
2088-2088
ISSN
2045-2322 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2612856300
Cited by
160
References
71
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3
FWCI
1.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Scientific Reports (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
Keywords
emotional interference, cognitive control, emotional Stroop task, emotional conflict, cognitive conflict, emotional salience, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, medial prefrontal cortex, dorsal anterior cingulate cortex, inferior frontal gyrus, neural correlates
MeSH terms
Brain, Cognition, Conflict, Psychological, Emotions, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Semantics, Stroop Test

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