Pictures cueing threat: brain dynamics in viewing explicitly instructed danger cues
Open accessAbstract
Recent event-related brain potential studies revealed the selective processing of emotional and threatening pictures. Integrating the picture viewing and threat-of-shock paradigm, the present study examined the processing of emotional pictures while they were explicitly instructed to cue threat of real world danger (i.e. electric shocks). Toward this end, 60 pleasant, neutral and unpleasant IAPS-pictures were presented (1 s) as a continuous random stream while high-density EEG and self-reported threat were assessed. In three experimental runs, each picture category was used once as a threat-cue, whereas in the other conditions the same category served as safety-cue. An additional passive viewing run served as a no-threat condition, thus, establishing a threat-safety continuum (threat-cue-safety-cue-no-threat) for each picture category. Threat-of-shock modulated P1, P2 and parieto-occipital LPP amplitudes. While the P1 component differentiated among threat- and no-threat conditions, the P2 and LPP effects were specific to pictures signaling threat-of-shock. Thus, stimulus processing progressively gained more accurate information about environmental threat conditions. Interestingly, the finding of increased EPN and centro-parietal LPP amplitudes to emotional pictures was independent from threat-of-shock manipulation. Accordingly, the results indicate distinct effects associated with the intrinsic significance of emotional pictures and explicitly instructed threat contingencies.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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 shown sensitive to biologically relevant information, such as the presentation of threatening information.
“which has been shown sensitive to biologically relevant information, such as the presentation of threatening information33–36”
From Event-related potentials of automatic imitation are modulated by ethnicity during stimulus processing, but not during motor execution (2018) · cites this paper as [33]
The early LPP increases in response to cues for threat of shock and during resolution of uncertainty, and decreases to signify uncertainty-related avoidance.
“The early LPP increases in response to cues for threat of shock (Bublatzky, & Schupp, 2012) and during resolution of uncertainty (Dieterich, Endrass, & Kathmann, 2016), and decreases to signify uncertainty-related avoidance (Gole, Schäfer, & Schienle, 2012).”
From Uncertainty increases neural indices of attention in obsessive-compulsive disorder (2017) · cites this paper as Bublatzky, & Schupp, 2012
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 59 · Cited by 114
- Authors
- Bublatzky, F., & Schupp, H. T.
- Affiliations
- University of Konstanz (DE)
- Venue
- Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2011-06-29
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 611-622
- ISSN
- 1749-5016 (ISSN-L)
- 1749-5024
- PMC
- PMC3427861
- OpenAlex
- W2148454917
- Cited by
- 114
- References
- 59
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 1.95
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- KOPS (University of Konstanz) (submittedVersion)
- MADOC (University of Mannheim) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
- Universität Mannheim
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
- Keywords
- threat processing, emotional pictures, P1 component, P2 component, late positive potential, event-related potentials, IAP
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Analysis of Variance, Brain, Brain Mapping, Cues, Electroencephalography, Evoked Potentials, Visual, Fear, Female, Humans, Male, Photic Stimulation, Time Factors, Young Adult, Self Report, Brain Waves
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