Cited by 664Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesNeurobiology of Language and BilingualismCognitive Abilities and Testing

Brain systems mediating cognitive interference by emotional distraction

Open access
Dolcos, Florin, McCarthy, Gregory·2006·The Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

Flexible behavior depends on our ability to cope with distracting stimuli that can interfere with the attainment of goals. Emotional distracters can be particularly disruptive to goal-oriented behavior, but the neural systems through which these detrimental effects are mediated are not known. We used event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging to investigate the effect of emotional and nonemotional distracters on a delayed-response working memory (WM) task. As expected, this task evoked robust activity during the delay period in typical WM regions (dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and lateral parietal cortex). Presentation of emotional distracters during the delay interval evoked strong activity in typical emotional processing regions (amygdala and ventrolateral prefrontal cortex) while simultaneously evoking relative deactivation of the WM regions and impairing WM performance. These results provide the first direct evidence that the detrimental effect of emotional distracters on ongoing cognitive processes entails the interaction between a dorsal neural system associated with “cold” executive processing and a ventral system associated with “hot” emotional processing.

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 · 10.1523/jneurosci.5042-05.2006

Cites

54 of 54 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?

  • Top-down modulatory regions have shown opposite activations during specific attentional tasks, suggesting mutual active suppression.

    “However, these top-down modulatory regions have shown opposite activations during specific attentional tasks (Simpson et al., 2000; Dolcos and McCarthy, 2006; Dolcos et al., 2011)—suggesting mutual active suppression.”

    From Top-Down Dysregulation—From ADHD to Emotional Instability (2016) · cites this paper as Dolcos and McCarthy, 2006

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

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Baddeley AD (1986) Working memory. Oxford: Oxford UP.
  2. Shields SA (1991) Gender in the psychology of emotion: a selective research review. In: International review of studies on emotion (Strongman KT, ed), pp 227-245. New York: Wiley.
  3. Talairach J, Tournoux P (1988) A co-planar sterotactic atlas of the human brain. Stuttgart, Germany: Thieme.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dolcos, F., & McCarthy, G.
Affiliations
Duke University (US)
Corresponding author
McCarthy, Gregory
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2006-02-15
Volume
26
Issue
7
Pages
2072-2079
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W2066186035
Cited by
663
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 23 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 40 · 2018: 37 · 2017: 35 · 2016: 40 · 2015: 53 · 2014: 34 · 2013: 46 · 2012: 54
FWCI
12.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
  • National Institutes of Health (NS41328, MH60451)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01 MH-05286, R01MH005286, P50MH60451, P50MH060451)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (P01NS041328, P01-NS41328)
  • NIH Clinical Center
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
Keywords
emotional distraction, cognitive interference, working memory, emotional distracters, amygdala, ventrolateral prefrontal cortex, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, lateral parietal cortex, executive function, emotional processing, delay period, neural deactivation, goal-directed behavior
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Brain, Cognition, Emotions, Face, Female, Humans, Functional Laterality, Male, Memory, Reaction Time

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