Hearing fearful prosody impairs visual working memory maintenance.

Auditory P2 Contralateral delay activity Emotional prosody Event-related potentials Interference Visual working memory

Journal

International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology
ISSN: 1872-7697
Titre abrégé: Int J Psychophysiol
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 8406214

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
May 2024
Historique:
received: 27 01 2024
revised: 10 03 2024
accepted: 25 03 2024
pubmed: 30 3 2024
medline: 30 3 2024
entrez: 29 3 2024
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Interference by distractors has been associated multiple times with diminished visual and auditory working memory (WM) performance. Negative emotional distractors in particular lead to detrimental effects on WM. However, these associations have only been seen when distractors and items to maintain in WM are from the same sensory modality. In this study, we investigate cross-modal interference on WM. We invited 20 participants to complete a visual change-detection task, assessing visual WM (VWM), while hearing emotional (fearful) and neutral auditory distractors. Electrophysiological activity was recorded to measure contralateral delay activity (CDA) and auditory P2 event-related potentials (ERP), indexing WM maintenance and distractor salience respectively. At the behavioral level, fearful prosody didn't decrease significantly working memory accuracy, compared to neutral prosody. Regarding ERPs, fearful distractors evoked a greater P2 amplitude than neutral distractors. Correlations between the two ERP potentials indicated that P2 amplitude difference between the two types of prosody was associated with the difference in CDA amplitude for fearful and neutral trials. This association suggests that cognitive resources required to process fearful prosody detrimentally impact VWM maintenance. That result provides a piece of additional evidence that negative emotional stimuli produce greater interference than neutral stimuli and that the cognitive resources used to process stimuli from different modalities come from a common pool.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38552908
pii: S0167-8760(24)00042-4
doi: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2024.112338
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

112338

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Auteurs

François Thiffault (F)

CogNAC Research Group (Cognition, Neurosciences, Affect et Comportement), Québec, Canada; Département de Psychologie, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, Québec, Canada. Electronic address: francois.thiffault2@uqtr.ca.

Justine Cinq-Mars (J)

CogNAC Research Group (Cognition, Neurosciences, Affect et Comportement), Québec, Canada; Département de Psychologie, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, Québec, Canada.

Benoît Brisson (B)

CogNAC Research Group (Cognition, Neurosciences, Affect et Comportement), Québec, Canada; Département de Psychologie, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, Québec, Canada. Electronic address: Benoit.Brisson@uqtr.ca.

Isabelle Blanchette (I)

CogNAC Research Group (Cognition, Neurosciences, Affect et Comportement), Québec, Canada; École de Psychologie, Université Laval, Québec, Québec, Canada; CERVO Brain Research Center, Québec, Québec, Canada. Electronic address: isabelle.blanchette.6@ulaval.ca.

Classifications MeSH