More efficient rejection of happy than of angry face distractors in visual search

Horstmann G, Scharlau I, Ansorge U (2006)
PSYCHONOMIC BULLETIN & REVIEW 13(6): 1067-1073.

Journal Article | Published | English

No fulltext has been uploaded

Author
; ;
Abstract
In the present study, we examined whether the detection advantage for negative-face targets in crowds of positive-face distractors over positive-face targets in crowds of negative faces can be explained by differentially efficient distractor rejection. Search Condition A demonstrated more efficient distractor rejection with negative-face targets in positive-face crowds than vice versa. Search Condition B showed that target identity alone is not sufficient to account for this effect, because there was no difference in processing efficiency for positive- and negative-face targets within neutral crowds. Search Condition C showed differentially efficient processing with neutral-face targets among positive- or negative-face distractors. These results were obtained with both a within-participants (Experiment 1) and a between-participants (Experiment 2) design. The pattern of results is consistent with the assumption that efficient rejection of positive (more homogenous) distractors is an important determinant of performance in search among (face) distractors.
Publishing Year
ISSN
eISSN
PUB-ID

Cite this

Horstmann G, Scharlau I, Ansorge U. More efficient rejection of happy than of angry face distractors in visual search. PSYCHONOMIC BULLETIN & REVIEW. 2006;13(6):1067-1073.
Horstmann, G., Scharlau, I., & Ansorge, U. (2006). More efficient rejection of happy than of angry face distractors in visual search. PSYCHONOMIC BULLETIN & REVIEW, 13(6), 1067-1073.
Horstmann, G., Scharlau, I., and Ansorge, U. (2006). More efficient rejection of happy than of angry face distractors in visual search. PSYCHONOMIC BULLETIN & REVIEW 13, 1067-1073.
Horstmann, G., Scharlau, I., & Ansorge, U., 2006. More efficient rejection of happy than of angry face distractors in visual search. PSYCHONOMIC BULLETIN & REVIEW, 13(6), p 1067-1073.
G. Horstmann, I. Scharlau, and U. Ansorge, “More efficient rejection of happy than of angry face distractors in visual search”, PSYCHONOMIC BULLETIN & REVIEW, vol. 13, 2006, pp. 1067-1073.
Horstmann, G., Scharlau, I., Ansorge, U.: More efficient rejection of happy than of angry face distractors in visual search. PSYCHONOMIC BULLETIN & REVIEW. 13, 1067-1073 (2006).
Horstmann, Gernot, Scharlau, Ingrid, and Ansorge, Ulrich. “More efficient rejection of happy than of angry face distractors in visual search”. PSYCHONOMIC BULLETIN & REVIEW 13.6 (2006): 1067-1073.
This data publication is cited in the following publications:
This publication cites the following data publications:

5 Citations in Europe PMC

Data provided by Europe PubMed Central.

The influence of working memory on the anger superiority effect.
Moriya J, Koster EH, De Raedt R., Cogn Emot 28(8), 2014
PMID: 24564850
Effects of alcohol on brain responses to social signals of threat in humans.
Sripada CS, Angstadt M, McNamara P, King AC, Phan KL., Neuroimage 55(1), 2011
PMID: 21122818

23 References

Data provided by Europe PubMed Central.


hampton, bulletin of the psychonomic society 27(), 1989

ledoux, 1998

wolfe, 1998
The Face of Wrath: Critical Features for Conveying Facial Threat
Lundqvist, Cognition and Emotion 13(6), 1999
Anxiety and attention to threatening pictures.
Yiend J, Mathews A., Q J Exp Psychol A 54(3), 2001
PMID: 11548029
Asymmetries in visual search: an introduction.
Wolfe JM., Percept Psychophys 63(3), 2001
PMID: 11414127
Differential attentional guidance by unattended faces expressing positive and negative emotion.
Eastwood JD, Smilek D, Merikle PM., Percept Psychophys 63(6), 2001
PMID: 11578045
Facial Expressions of Emotion: Are Angry Faces Detected More Efficiently?
Fox, Cognition and Emotion 14(1), 2000
A feature-integration theory of attention.
Treisman AM, Gelade G., Cogn Psychol 12(1), 1980
PMID: 7351125
Visual search and stimulus similarity.
Duncan J, Humphreys GW., Psychol Rev 96(3), 1989
PMID: 2756067
Feature analysis in early vision: evidence from search asymmetries.
Treisman A, Gormican S., Psychol Rev 95(1), 1988
PMID: 3353475
Finding the face in the crowd: an anger superiority effect.
Hansen CH, Hansen RD., J Pers Soc Psychol 54(6), 1988
PMID: 3397866
Preattentive analysis of facial expressions of emotion
White, Cognition & Emotion 9(5), 1995
Negative facial expression captures attention and disrupts performance.
Eastwood JD, Smilek D, Merikle PM., Percept Psychophys 65(3), 2003
PMID: 12785065
Attentional bias for threat: Evidence for delayed disengagement from emotional faces
Fox, Cognition and Emotion 16(3), 2002
Search asymmetry: a diagnostic for preattentive processing of separable features.
Treisman A, Souther J., J Exp Psychol Gen 114(3), 1985
PMID: 3161978
The face in the crowd revisited: a threat advantage with schematic stimuli.
Ohman A, Lundqvist D, Esteves F., J Pers Soc Psychol 80(3), 2001
PMID: 11300573
Flanker effects with faces may depend on perceptual as well as emotional differences.
Horstmann G, Borgstedt K, Heumann M., Emotion 6(1), 2006
PMID: 16637748
On the cost and benefit of cost and benefit.
Jonides, Psychological Bulletin 96(1), 1984
Faces and facial expressions do not pop out.
Nothdurft HC., Perception 22(11), 1993
PMID: 8047415
It takes a confounded face to pop out of a crowd.
Purcell DG, Stewart AL, Skov RB., Perception 25(9), 1996
PMID: 8983049

Export

0 Marked Publications

Open Data PUB

Web of Science

View record in Web of Science®

Sources

PMID: 17484437
PubMed | Europe PMC

Search this title in

Google Scholar