Processing of feedback is differentially modulated by goal conduciveness and coping potential
-
1
University of Geneva, Switzerland
Emotional events are not only evaluated as pleasant or unpleasant, but also on whether we can do something to change their outcome. One influential appraisal model of emotion (Scherer’s component process model, CPM) postulates that the evaluation of an event follows a fixed temporal sequence of appraisal checks: novelty, intrinsic pleasantness, task-goal relevance, goal conduciveness, coping potential, and normative significance. Our goal was to test the prediction of the CPM that goal conduciveness is processed before coping potential. We used a monetary gambling task to investigate the neural mechanisms involved in the evaluation of feedback related to goal conduciveness (gain vs. loss of money vs. break even) and coping potential (presence vs. absence of option to change outcome). In each trial, information about these two appraisal checks was simultaneously presented, while EEG and facial EMG were recorded in 24 female participants. The data suggest, in line with the predictions of the CPM, that the feedback-locked event-related potentials show differential effects of goal conduciveness and coping potential. These results will be interpreted as supporting the importance of distinguishing between different appraisal checks when investigating the processing of an emotional event.
Keywords:
EEG,
emotion
Conference:
XI International Conference on Cognitive Neuroscience (ICON XI), Palma, Mallorca, Spain, 25 Sep - 29 Sep, 2011.
Presentation Type:
Poster Presentation
Topic:
Poster Sessions: Emotion, Motivation and the Social Brain
Citation:
Gentsch
K,
Grandjean
DM and
Scherer
KR
(2011). Processing of feedback is differentially modulated by goal conduciveness and coping potential.
Conference Abstract:
XI International Conference on Cognitive Neuroscience (ICON XI).
doi: 10.3389/conf.fnhum.2011.207.00155
Copyright:
The abstracts in this collection have not been subject to any Frontiers peer review or checks, and are not endorsed by Frontiers.
They are made available through the Frontiers publishing platform as a service to conference organizers and presenters.
The copyright in the individual abstracts is owned by the author of each abstract or his/her employer unless otherwise stated.
Each abstract, as well as the collection of abstracts, are published under a Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0 (attribution) licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) and may thus be reproduced, translated, adapted and be the subject of derivative works provided the authors and Frontiers are attributed.
For Frontiers’ terms and conditions please see https://www.frontiersin.org/legal/terms-and-conditions.
Received:
17 Nov 2011;
Published Online:
28 Nov 2011.
*
Correspondence:
Dr. Kornelia Gentsch, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland, kornelia.gentsch@unige.ch