Scholarlink

<p>Adaptive behavior in social interactions requires the effective processing of conflicting emotional information. The impact of expectancy on conflict processing remains a relevant research question. Here we investigated the influence of primed expectancy on conflict processing. To achieve this goal, we used the Emotional Stroop paradigm and variants where expectancy was introduced using facial expression or emotional letter labels. Neurophysiological and behavioral data were collected from 20 healthy participants who completed these three conditions (in the presence or absence of prior expectancy cues). We examined conflict-related components N450 and the Conflict Slow Potential in the classical Emotional Stroop condition and in conditions with manipulated expectancy. When expectancy was introduced, we found a significant effect on conflict processing, with a difference between face and letter emotion cues. Parietal alpha and beta power decreases occurred specifically for face expectancy cues and changed only minimally during conflict, whereas label-based expectancy was associated with less desynchronization during expectancy and a stronger alpha/beta decrease during conflict. These findings suggest that attentional resources are differently prioritized by face versus letter emotion expectancy cues, with face-driven expectancy generating distinctive neurophysiological patterns and a potential facilitation of subsequent conflict resolution.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Face expectancy cues differentially modulate conflict processing driven by emotional incongruence: an EEG study

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年1月10日

查看全文
  • Maria Pires Coelho,
  • Daniel Agostinho,
  • Teresa Sousa,
  • Gabriel Pires,
  • Miguel Castelo-Branco

摘要

Adaptive behavior in social interactions requires the effective processing of conflicting emotional information. The impact of expectancy on conflict processing remains a relevant research question. Here we investigated the influence of primed expectancy on conflict processing. To achieve this goal, we used the Emotional Stroop paradigm and variants where expectancy was introduced using facial expression or emotional letter labels. Neurophysiological and behavioral data were collected from 20 healthy participants who completed these three conditions (in the presence or absence of prior expectancy cues). We examined conflict-related components N450 and the Conflict Slow Potential in the classical Emotional Stroop condition and in conditions with manipulated expectancy. When expectancy was introduced, we found a significant effect on conflict processing, with a difference between face and letter emotion cues. Parietal alpha and beta power decreases occurred specifically for face expectancy cues and changed only minimally during conflict, whereas label-based expectancy was associated with less desynchronization during expectancy and a stronger alpha/beta decrease during conflict. These findings suggest that attentional resources are differently prioritized by face versus letter emotion expectancy cues, with face-driven expectancy generating distinctive neurophysiological patterns and a potential facilitation of subsequent conflict resolution.