An ERP investigation of age differences in the negativity bias for self-relevant and non-self-relevant stimuli.

Eric C Fields, Holly J Bowen, Ryan T Daley, Katelyn R Parisi, Angela Gutchess, Elizabeth A Kensinger
Author Information
  1. Eric C Fields: Boston College, Chestnut Hill, MA, USA; Brandeis University, Waltham, MA, USA. Electronic address: eric.fields@bc.edu.
  2. Holly J Bowen: Southern Methodist University, Dallas, TX, USA.
  3. Ryan T Daley: Boston College, Chestnut Hill, MA, USA.
  4. Katelyn R Parisi: Boston College, Chestnut Hill, MA, USA; Brandeis University, Waltham, MA, USA.
  5. Angela Gutchess: Brandeis University, Waltham, MA, USA.
  6. Elizabeth A Kensinger: Boston College, Chestnut Hill, MA, USA.

Abstract

As we age, we show increased attention and memory for positive versus negative information, and a key event-related potential (ERP) marker of emotion processing, the late positive potential (LPP), is sensitive to these changes. In young adults the emotion effect on the LPP is also quite sensitive to the self-relevance of stimuli. Here we investigated whether the shift toward positive stimuli with age would be magnified by self-relevance. Participants read 2-sentence scenarios that were either self-relevant or non-self-relevant with a neutral, positive, or negative critical word in the second sentence. The LPP was largest for self-relevant negative information in young adults, with no significant effects of emotion for non-self-relevant scenarios. In contrast, older adults showed a smaller negativity bias, and the effect of emotion was not modulated by self-relevance. The 3-way interaction of age, emotion, and self-relevance suggests that the presence of self-relevant stimuli may reduce or inhibit effects of emotion for non-self-relevant stimuli on the LPP in young adults, but that older adults do not show this effect to the same extent.

Keywords

References

  1. Front Aging Neurosci. 2015 Aug 06;7:143 [PMID: 26300770]
  2. Psychophysiology. 2017 Jan;54(1):146-157 [PMID: 28000253]
  3. Psychophysiology. 2020 Feb;57(2):e13468 [PMID: 31456213]
  4. Soc Neurosci. 2007;2(2):117-33 [PMID: 18633811]
  5. Am Psychol. 1991 Aug;46(8):819-34 [PMID: 1928936]
  6. J Cogn Neurosci. 2009 Nov;21(11):2245-62 [PMID: 18855550]
  7. Trends Cogn Sci. 2018 Aug;22(8):712-724 [PMID: 29886010]
  8. Emotion. 2010 Dec;10(6):767-82 [PMID: 21058848]
  9. Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2017 Jun;70(6):987-995 [PMID: 28059625]
  10. Behav Cogn Neurosci Rev. 2003 Jun;2(2):115-29 [PMID: 13678519]
  11. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2016 Jun;16(3):415-32 [PMID: 26833048]
  12. Biol Psychol. 2008 Mar;77(3):247-65 [PMID: 18164800]
  13. Memory. 2016 Aug;24(7):916-38 [PMID: 27322885]
  14. Emotion. 2006 May;6(2):257-68 [PMID: 16768558]
  15. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2011 Mar;6(2):114-33 [PMID: 21660127]
  16. Soc Neurosci. 2011;6(3):277-88 [PMID: 21104542]
  17. Neurosci Lett. 2010 Jan 29;469(3):328-32 [PMID: 20026179]
  18. Biol Psychol. 2010 May;84(2):318-24 [PMID: 20298741]
  19. Psychol Aging. 2011 Sep;26(3):636-46 [PMID: 21480719]
  20. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2014 Jul;9(4):388-407 [PMID: 26173272]
  21. Psychophysiology. 2018 Apr;55(4): [PMID: 29023754]
  22. Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2017 Jun;70(6):1033-1052 [PMID: 26652616]
  23. Front Hum Neurosci. 2014 Apr 14;8:213 [PMID: 24782741]
  24. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2019 Oct;19(5):1299-1316 [PMID: 31367982]
  25. Curr Opin Behav Sci. 2018 Feb;19:7-12 [PMID: 30327789]
  26. Am J Psychiatry. 2010 May;167(5):536-44 [PMID: 20360316]
  27. Psychophysiology. 2010 Sep;47(5):888-904 [PMID: 20374541]
  28. Psychophysiology. 2017 Jan;54(1):100-113 [PMID: 28000250]
  29. Brain Lang. 2016 Feb;153-154:38-49 [PMID: 26894680]
  30. Clin Neurophysiol. 2007 Oct;118(10):2128-48 [PMID: 17573239]
  31. Memory. 2007 Nov;15(8):822-37 [PMID: 18033620]
  32. J Am Stat Assoc. 1990 Sep;85(411):609-16 [PMID: 12155387]
  33. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2011 Oct;6(5):653-61 [PMID: 20855295]
  34. PLoS One. 2013;8(2):e55885 [PMID: 23405230]
  35. Front Hum Neurosci. 2012 Feb 27;6:33 [PMID: 22375117]
  36. Psychophysiology. 2015 Aug;52(8):997-1009 [PMID: 25903295]
  37. Psychophysiology. 2020 Jul;57(7):e13570 [PMID: 32243623]
  38. Brain Cogn. 2007 Mar;63(2):182-9 [PMID: 17223240]
  39. Psychophysiology. 2011 Dec;48(12):1711-25 [PMID: 21895683]
  40. J Neurosci Methods. 2007 Aug 15;164(1):177-90 [PMID: 17517438]
  41. Front Hum Neurosci. 2013 Jun 06;7:264 [PMID: 23761757]
  42. Psychophysiology. 2014 Jul;51(7):673-84 [PMID: 24673606]
  43. Psychophysiology. 2006 May;43(3):292-6 [PMID: 16805868]
  44. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2015 Sep;10(9):1202-9 [PMID: 25605967]
  45. Front Psychol. 2012 Sep 27;3:339 [PMID: 23060825]
  46. Psychol Aging. 2006 Dec;21(4):815-20 [PMID: 17201501]
  47. Behav Brain Sci. 2016 Jan;39:e200 [PMID: 26126507]
  48. Emotion. 2009 Jun;9(3):369-77 [PMID: 19485614]
  49. Prog Brain Res. 2006;156:185-203 [PMID: 17015080]
  50. Psychon Bull Rev. 2018 Oct;25(5):1695-1716 [PMID: 29019064]
  51. PLoS One. 2016 Sep 02;11(9):e0162323 [PMID: 27589393]
  52. Psychol Methods. 2003 Dec;8(4):434-47 [PMID: 14664681]
  53. Am Psychol. 1999 Mar;54(3):165-81 [PMID: 10199217]
  54. J Cogn Neurosci. 2011 Oct;23(10):2994-3007 [PMID: 21268668]
  55. Psychol Sci. 2009 Jan;20(1):27-32 [PMID: 19076318]
  56. Psychol Bull. 1997 May;121(3):371-94 [PMID: 9136641]
  57. Psychol Sci. 2007 Sep;18(9):838-43 [PMID: 17760782]
  58. Neuroimage. 2012 Aug 1;62(1):562-74 [PMID: 22584232]
  59. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1998 Sep;108(5):456-71 [PMID: 9780016]
  60. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2006 Dec;6(4):291-7 [PMID: 17458444]
  61. Front Psychol. 2014 Nov 11;5:1292 [PMID: 25426095]
  62. Psychol Aging. 2014 Mar;29(1):1-15 [PMID: 24660792]
  63. Neural Comput. 1999 Feb 15;11(2):417-41 [PMID: 9950738]
  64. PLoS One. 2014 Jun 16;9(6):e99523 [PMID: 24932857]
  65. Front Psychol. 2016 Jan 13;6:2003 [PMID: 26793138]
  66. J Neurosci Methods. 2004 Mar 15;134(1):9-21 [PMID: 15102499]
  67. Brain Lang. 2012 Sep;122(3):211-26 [PMID: 22277309]

Grants

  1. R21 AG051853/NIA NIH HHS
  2. T32 NS007292/NINDS NIH HHS

MeSH Term

Adolescent
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Aging
Attention
Emotions
Evoked Potentials
Female
Humans
Male
Memory
Middle Aged
Self Stimulation
Young Adult

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0emotionLPPadultsstimuliagepositiveeffectself-relevanceself-relevantnon-self-relevantnegativeERPyoungbiasshowinformationpotentialsensitivescenarioseffectsoldernegativityincreasedattentionmemoryversuskeyevent-relatedmarkerprocessinglatechangesalsoquiteinvestigatedwhethershifttowardmagnifiedParticipantsread2-sentenceeitherneutralcriticalwordsecondsentencelargestsignificantcontrastshowedsmallermodulated3-wayinteractionsuggestspresencemayreduceinhibitextentinvestigationdifferencesEvent-relatedpotentialsNegativityPositivitySelfSelf-relevance

Similar Articles

Cited By