Abstract
There is debate as to whether emotionally charged words receive preferential attentional processing in normal individuals. Using a digit-parity task, Harris and Pashler (2004) found that threat-related words captured attention on only the first trial, suggesting no attention capture for emotional words aside from an initial surprise reaction. We examined whether sexually explicit words would be more effective at capturing attention in a similar task. Our results with threat words replicated those of Harris and Pashler in that threat words did not lead to an increase in reaction time (RT) on the parity task, relative to emotionally neutral words. However, sexual words led to a marked increase in RTs for over 100 trials. Words’ arousal ratings, but not their valence ratings, predicted the amount of interference. Parity RTs for individual words were also related to memory for the word on a surprise memory test. Sexually explicit words may have more potential to capture attention than do threat-related words. The words presented here as distractors in the digit-parity task, along with their corresponding valence ratings, arousal ratings, and digit-parity RTs, can be downloaded from www.psychonomic.org/archive.
Article PDF
References
Anderson, A. K. (2005). Affective influences on the attentional dynamics supporting awareness.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,134, 258–281.
Arnell, K. M., Killman, K. V., & Fijavz, D. (in press). Blinded by emotion: Target misses follow attentional capture by arousing distractors in RSVP.Emotion.
Dalgleish, T. (1995). Performance on the emotional Stroop task in groups of anxious, expert, and control subjects: A comparison of computer and card presentation formats.Cognition & Emotion,9, 341–362.
Dijksterhuis, A., &Aarts, H. (2003). On wildebeests and humans: The preferential detection of negative stimuli.Psychological Science,14, 14–18.
Harris, C. R., &Pashler, H. (2004). Attention and the processing of emotional words and names: Not so special after all.Psychological Science,15, 171–178.
Kučera, H., &Francis, W. N. (1967).Computational analysis of presentday American English. Providence, RI: Brown University Press.
Larsen, R. J., Mercer, K. A., &Balota, D. A. (2006). Lexical characteristics of words used in emotional Stroop experiments.Emotion,6, 62–72.
MacKay, D. G., Shafto, M., Taylor, J. K., Marian, D. E., Abrams, L., &Dyer, J. R. (2004). Relations between emotion, memory, and attention: Evidence from taboo Stroop, lexical decision, and immediate memory tasks.Memory & Cognition,32, 474–488.
McKenna, F. P., &Sharma, D. (1995). Intrusive cognitions: An investigation of the emotional Stroop task.Journal of Experimental Psychology,21, 1595–1607.
Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002). E-Prime user’s guide [Computer software]. Pittsburgh: Psychology Software Tools, Inc.
Williams, J. M. G., Mathews, A., &MacLeod, C. (1996). The emotional Stroop task and psychopathology.Psychological Bulletin,120, 2–24.
Wolford, G., &Morrison, F. (1980). Processing of unattended visual information.Memory & Cognition,8, 521–527.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This work was made possible by an operating grant from NSERC and an infrastructure grant from the CFI and OIT to the second author.
Note—Accepted by David A. Balota’s editorial team.
Electronic supplementary material
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Aquino, J.M., Arnell, K.M. Attention and the processing of emotional words: Dissociating effects of arousal. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 14, 430–435 (2007). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194084
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194084