Abstract
The congruency sequence effect (CSE) refers to the reduced distractor interference following conflict trials compared to following non-conflict trials. According to the affective account, the enhancement of cognitive control necessary to resolve the negative affect caused by conflict drives the CSE. Research supporting this view has shown that the induction of negative affect leads to increases in the CSE. In contrast, the dual competition model predicts that the processing of task-irrelevant high-threatening stimuli consumes the resources required for cognitive control, reducing the CSE. To test the impact of threat on the CSE, the present study examined the modulation of the CSE in the threatening context induced by electric shocks. Participants were to perform two Simon tasks or two flanker-compatibility tasks both under threat of shock and without such threat. Consistent with the dual competition model, the CSE obtained in the safe context disappeared under the threat of shock, regardless of whether participants performed stimulus-based conflict tasks or response-based conflict tasks. This paper discusses the implications of this finding in relation to the CSE’s driving motivation, aiming to reconcile these discrepant results with previous findings supporting the affective account.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Birk, J. L., Rogers, A. H., Shahane, A. D., & Urry, H. (2018). The heart of control: Proactive cognitive control training limits anxious cardiac arousal under stress. Motivation and Emotion, 42, 64–78.
Bishop, S. J. (2009). Trait anxiety and impoverished prefrontal control of attention. Nature Neuroscience, 12(1), 92–98.
Botvinick, M. M. (2007). Conflict monitoring and decision making: Reconciling two perspectives on anterior cingulate function. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 7(4), 356–366.
Botvinick, M., & Braver, T. (2015). Motivation and cognitive control: From behavior to neural mechanism. Annual Review of Psychology, 66, 83–113.
Botvinick, M. M., Braver, T. S., Barch, D. M., Carter, C. S., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). Conflict monitoring and cognitive control. Psychological Review, 108(3), 624–652.
Braem, S., Verguts, T., Roggeman, C., & Notebaert, W. (2012). Reward modulates adaptations to conflict. Cognition, 125(2), 324–332.
Choi, J. M., Padmala, S., & Pessoa, L. (2012). Impact of state anxiety on the interaction between threat monitoring and cognition. Neuroimage, 59(2), 1912–1923.
Dignath, D., & Eder, A. B. (2015). Stimulus conflict triggers behavioral avoidance. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 15(4), 822–836.
Dignath, D., Janczyk, M., & Eder, A. B. (2017). Phasic valence and arousal do not influence post-conflict adjustments in the Simon task. Acta Psychologica, 174, 31–39.
Dignath, D., Kiesel, A., & Eder, A. B. (2015). Flexible conflict management: Conflict avoidance and conflict adjustment in reactive cognitive control. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 41(4), 975–988.
Dreisbach, G., & Fischer, R. (2012). Conflicts as aversive signals. Brain and Cognition, 78(2), 94–98.
Dreisbach, G., & Fischer, R. (2015). Conflicts as aversive signals for control adaptation. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 24(4), 255–260.
Eder, A. B., Dignath, D., Erle, T. M., & Wiemer, J. (2017). Shocking action: Facilitative effects of punishing electric shocks on action control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 146(8), 1204–1215.
Egner, T. (2008). Multiple conflict-driven control mechanisms in the human brain. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12(10), 374–380.
Egner, T., & Hirsch, J. (2005). Cognitive control mechanisms resolve conflict through cortical amplification of task-relevant information. Nature Neuroscience, 8(12), 1784–1790.
Eriksen, B. A., & Eriksen, C. W. (1974). Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task. Perception & Psychophysics, 16(1), 143–149.
Eysenck, M. W., Derakshan, N., Santos, R., & Calvo, M. G. (2007). Anxiety and cognitive performance: Attentional control theory. Emotion, 7(2), 336–353.
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G* Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191.
Fischer, R., Ventura-Bort, C., Hamm, A., & Weymar, M. (2018). Transcutaneous vagus nerve stimulation (tVNS) enhances conflict-triggered adjustment of cognitive control. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 18, 680–693.
Fritz, J., & Dreisbach, G. (2013). Conflicts as aversive signals: Conflict priming increases negative judgments for neutral stimuli. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 13(2), 311–317.
Fritz, J., & Dreisbach, G. (2015). The time course of the aversive conflict signal. Experimental Psychology, 62(1), 30–39.
Gratton, G., Coles, M. G., & Donchin, E. (1992). Optimizing the use of information: Strategic control of activation of responses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 121(4), 480.
Gray, J. R. (2001). Emotional modulation of cognitive control: Approach–withdrawal states double-dissociate spatial from verbal two-back task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130(3), 436–452.
Grillon, C., Baas, J. M., Cornwell, B., & Johnson, L. (2006). Context conditioning and behavioral avoidance in a virtual reality environment: Effect of predictability. Biological Psychiatry, 60(7), 752–759.
Grupe, D. W., & Nitschke, J. B. (2013). Uncertainty and anticipation in anxiety: An integrated neurobiological and psychological perspective. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 14(7), 488–501.
Henderson, R. K., Snyder, H. R., Gupta, T., & Banich, M. T. (2012). When does stress help or harm? The effects of stress controllability and subjective stress response on Stroop performance. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 179.
Hommel, B., Proctor, R. W., & Vu, K. P. L. (2004). A feature-integration account of sequential effects in the Simon task. Psychological Research, 68(1), 1–17.
Inzlicht, M., Bartholow, B. D., & Hirsh, J. B. (2015). Emotional foundations of cognitive control. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 19(3), 126–132.
Jeong H., & Cho Y. S. (2019). The Effects of Induced and Trait Anxieties on Implicit Emotion Regulation in Non-pathological Individuals. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Kahneman, D. (1973). Attention and effort (Vol. 1063). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Kanske, P., & Kotz, S. A. (2010). Emotion speeds up conflict resolution: A new role for the ventral anterior cingulate cortex? Cerebral Cortex, 21(4), 911–919.
Kerns, J. G., Cohen, J. D., MacDonald, A. W., Cho, R. Y., Stenger, V. A., & Carter, C. S. (2004). Anterior cingulate conflict monitoring and adjustments in control. Science, 303(5660), 1023–1026.
Kim, S., & Cho, Y. S. (2014). Congruency sequence effect without feature integration and contingency learning. Acta Psychologica, 149, 60–68.
Kim, S., Lee, S. H., & Cho, Y. S. (2015). Control processes through the suppression of the automatic response activation triggered by task-irrelevant information in the Simon-type tasks. Acta Psychologica, 162, 51–61.
Kornblum, S., Hasbroucq, T., & Osman, A. (1990). Dimensional overlap: Cognitive basis for stimulus-response compatibility: A model and taxonomy. Psychological Review, 97(2), 253–270.
Lee, J., & Cho, Y. S. (2013). Congruency sequence effect in cross-task context: Evidence for dimension-specific modulation. Acta Psychologica, 144(3), 617–627.
Maier, S. F., & Seligman, M. E. (1976). Learned helplessness: Theory and evidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 105(1), 3–46.
Mansfield, K. L., van der Molen, M. W., Falkenstein, M., & van Boxtel, G. J. (2013). Temporal dynamics of interference in Simon and Eriksen tasks considered within the context of a dual-process model. Brain and Cognition, 82(3), 353–363.
Mennin, D. S., Holaway, R. M., Fresco, D. M., Moore, M. T., & Heimberg, R. G. (2007). Delineating components of emotion and its dysregulation in anxiety and mood psychopathology. Behavior Therapy, 38(3), 284–302.
Notebaert, W., & Verguts, T. (2008). Cognitive control acts locally. Cognition, 106(2), 1071–1080.
Ochsner, K. N., & Gross, J. J. (2005). The cognitive control of emotion. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(5), 242–249.
Osinsky, R., Alexander, N., Gebhardt, H., & Hennig, J. (2010). Trait anxiety and dynamic adjustments in conflict processing. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 10(3), 372–381.
Osinsky, R., Gebhardt, H., Alexander, N., & Hennig, J. (2012). Trait anxiety and the dynamics of attentional control. Biological Psychology, 89(1), 252–259.
Padmala, S., Bauer, A., & Pessoa, L. (2011). Negative emotion impairs conflict-driven executive control. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 192.
Pessoa, L. (2009). How do emotion and motivation direct executive control? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13(4), 160–166.
Plessow, F., Fischer, R., Kirschbaum, C., & Goschke, T. (2011). Inflexibly focused under stress: Acute psychosocial stress increases shielding of action goals at the expense of reduced cognitive flexibility with increasing time lag to the stressor. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23(11), 3218–3227.
Posner, M. I., & Snyder, C. R. R. (1975). Attention and cognitive control. In R. L. Solso (Ed.), Information processing and cognition: The Loyola Symposium (pp. 55–85). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Robinson, O. J., Vytal, K., Cornwell, B. R., & Grillon, C. (2013). The impact of anxiety upon cognition: Perspectives from human threat of shock studies. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7, 203.
Sadeh, N., & Verona, E. (2008). Psychopathic personality traits associated with abnormal selective attention and impaired cognitive control. Neuropsychology, 22(5), 669–680.
Schuch, S., & Koch, I. (2015). Mood states influence cognitive control: The case of conflict adaptation. Psychological Research, 79(5), 759–772.
Seligman, M. E. P. (1975). Helplessness: On depression, development, and death. San Francisco, NY: W.H. Freeman.
Shackman, A. J., Maxwell, J. S., McMenamin, B. W., Greischar, L. L., & Davidson, R. J. (2011). Stress potentiates early and attenuates late stages of visual processing. Journal of Neuroscience, 31(3), 1156–1161.
Shankman, S. A., Robison-Andrew, E. J., Nelson, B. D., Altman, S. E., & Campbell, M. L. (2011). Effects of predictability of shock timing and intensity on aversive responses. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 80(2), 112–118.
Simon, J. R. (1990). The effects of an irrelevant directional cue on human information processing. In R. W. Proctor & T. G. Reeve (Eds.), Stimulus-response compatibility: An integrated perspective (pp. 31–86). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Soutschek, A., Strobach, T., & Schubert, T. (2014). Motivational and cognitive determinants of control during conflict processing. Cognition and Emotion, 28(6), 1076–1089.
Spielberger, C. D., Gorsuch, R. L., Lushene, R. E., Vagg, R. E., & Jacobs, G. A. (1983). Manual for the state-trait anxiety inventory. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Stürmer, B., Leuthold, H., Soetens, E., Schröter, H., & Sommer, W. (2002). Control over location-based response activation in the Simon task: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28(6), 1345–1363.
Stürmer, B., Nigbur, R., Schacht, A., & Sommer, W. (2011). Reward and punishment effects on error processing and conflict control. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 335.
van Steenbergen, H. (2015). Affective modulation of cognitive control: A biobehavioral perspective. In G. H. E. Gendolloa, M. Tops, & S. L. Koole (Eds.), Handbook of biobehavioral approaches to self-regulation (Vol. 31, pp. 89–107). New York: Springer.
van Steenbergen, H., Band, G. P., & Hommel, B. (2009). Reward counteracts conflict adaptation: Evidence for a role of affect in executive control. Psychological Science, 20(12), 1473–1477.
van Steenbergen, H., Band, G. P., & Hommel, B. (2010). In the mood for adaptation: How affect regulates conflict-driven control. Psychological Science, 21(11), 1629–1634.
van Steenbergen, H., Band, G. P., & Hommel, B. (2012). Reward valence modulates conflict-driven attentional adaptation: Electrophysiological evidence. Biological Psychology, 90(3), 234–241.
van Steenbergen, H., Band, G. P., & Hommel, B. (2015). Does conflict help or hurt cognitive control? Initial evidence for an inverted U-shape relationship between perceived task difficulty and conflict adaptation. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 974.
Verbruggen, F., Notebaert, W., Liefooghe, B., & Vandierendonck, A. (2006). Stimulus-and response-conflict-induced cognitive control in the flanker task. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13(2), 328–333.
Yang, Q., & Pourtois, G. (2018). Conflict-driven adaptive control is enhanced by integral negative emotion on a short time scale. Cognition and Emotion, 32(8), 1637–1653.
Zeng, Q., Qi, S., Li, M., Yao, S., Ding, C., & Yang, D. (2017). Enhanced conflict-driven cognitive control by emotional arousal, not by valence. Cognition and Emotion, 31(6), 1083–1096.
Zinchenko, A., Kanske, P., Obermeier, C., Schroger, E., & Kotz, S. A. (2015). Emotion and goal-directed behavior: ERP evidence on cognitive and emotional conflict. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 10(11), 1577–1587.
Funding
This research was supported by the Brain Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Science, ICT & Future Planning (NRF-2015M3C7A1031969).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Ethical approval
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Jeong, H.J., Cho, Y.S. Cognitive control under high threat: the effect of shock on the congruency sequence effect. Motiv Emot 43, 906–916 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-019-09793-7
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-019-09793-7