바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

ACOMS+ 및 학술지 리포지터리 설명회

  • 한국과학기술정보연구원(KISTI) 서울분원 대회의실(별관 3층)
  • 2024년 07월 03일(수) 13:30
사전등록 바로가기
 

logo

  • P-ISSN1226-9654
  • E-ISSN2733-466X
  • KCI

ISSN : 1226-9654

논문 상세

다음
논문 투고

Vol.25 No.3

Citation Share

지각적 복잡성과 정서가가 IAPS 자극 처리에 미치는 영향: ERP 연구

The Effects of Perceptual Complexity and Valence on IAPS Picture Processing: an ERP study

한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물 / The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, (P)1226-9654; (E)2733-466X
2013, v.25 no.3, pp.249-271
https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2013.25.3.001
박수담 (전남대학교 심리학과)
박태진 (전남대학교)
박수담, & 박태진. (2013). 지각적 복잡성과 정서가가 IAPS 자극 처리에 미치는 영향: ERP 연구. 한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물, 25(3), 249-271, https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2013.25.3.001

초록

본 연구는 IAPS 사진자극의 정서가와 지각적 복잡성이 정서자극 처리에 미치는 영향을 ERP(event-related potential) 성분 분석 및 진동분석을 통해 밝히고자 하였다. LPP(late positive potential)나 EPN(early posterior negativity)과 같은 ERP 성분들은 정서가 뿐만 아니라 지각적 복잡성의 영향을 받는다고 최근 보고되었다. IAPS 사진자극의 지각적 복잡성(단순/복잡)과 정서가(긍정/중립/부정)를 조작하고 EPN(220-280ms), LPP(350-600ms), 그리고 delta파(1-3Hz) 상에서 두 변인의 효과를 관찰하였다. 참가자들에게 IAPS자극에 대해 정서적 판단을 요구하면서 ERP를 측정 추출하였다. 그 결과, 후두-측두영역의 EPN 평균진폭에 있어 정서가와 지각적 복잡성, 그리고 상호작용의 효과가 모두 관찰되었는데, 긍정자극과 중립자극에서는 복잡조건이 단순조건보다 진폭이 더 컸지만 부정자극에서는 복잡성효과가 관찰되지 않았고, 복잡조건에서는 긍정자극과 중립자극에 비해 부정자극의 진폭이 더 작았지만(부정자극의 EPN 정서효과) 단순조건에서는 정서가조건들간 차이가 관찰되지 않았다(EPN 정서효과가 없었음). 두정영역의 LPP 평균진폭에 있어 정서가와 지각적 복잡성의 효과가 관찰되었는데, 두 복잡성조건 모두에서 긍정자극과 중립자극에 비해 부정자극의 진폭이 더 컸으며(부정자극의 LPP 정서효과), 긍정자극과 중립자극에서는 단순조건이 복잡조건보다 진폭이 더 컸지만 부정자극에서는 복잡성효과가 관찰되지 않았다. LPP와 EPN 모두에서 반구 관련 상호작용효과는 관찰되지 않았다. 두정영역의 delta파에 대해 최대 정점간 진폭을 분석한 결과 복잡성효과는 관찰되지 않았고 정서효과만 관찰되었는데, 긍정자극과 중립자극에 비해 부정자극의 진폭이 더 컸다. 요약하면, LPP와 EPN이 정서가 뿐만 아니라 지각적 복잡성의 영향을 받았지만 부정자극은 긍정자극이나 중립자극과 달리 지각적 복잡성의 영향을 받지 않았고, 두정부위의 delta파는 LPP와 관련되지만 지각적 복잡성에는 기여하지 않고 정서가에만 기여하였다. 이러한 결과는 전반적으로 부정자극 처리의 동기적 중요성과 우선성을 시사한다.

keywords
IAPS, affective valence, perceptual complexity, LPP, EPN, delta frequency, 국제정서사진체계(IAPS), 정서가, 지각적 복잡성, LPP, EPN, delta

Abstract

This study examined the effects of affective valence and perceptual complexity of the IAPS (International Affective Picture System) pictures on affective picture processing using ERP (event-related potential) component analysis. ERP components as EPN (early posterior negativity) and LPP (late positive potential) have been reported to be modulated by valence, but some recent studies reported that LPP could be modulated by perceptual complexity as well as valence. To elucidate the modulatory effects of perceptual complexity and valence of IAPS pictures on ERPs, we examined the interaction of perceptual and affective modulations at EPN (220-280ms time window), LPP (350-600ms time window) and delta frequency (1-3Hz). Participants were asked to do affective judgement about each of IAPS pictures while ERPs were recorded. Average amplitudes of EPN at occipito-temporal area demonstrated significant effect of valence, perceptual complexity, and interaction of valence and complexity. For neutral and positive pictures, complex pictures showed higher amplitude than simple pictures, but no complexity effect was found for negative pictures. For complex pictures, negative pictures showed lower amplitude than neutral and positive pictures (EPN emotion effect of negative pictures), but no valence effect was found for simple pictures (no EPN emotion effect). Average amplitudes of LPP at parietal area demonstrated significant effect of valence and perceptual complexity. Negative pictures showed higher amplitude than neutral and positive pictures for both complex and simple pictures (LPP emotion effect of negative pictures). For neutral and positive pictures, simple pictures showed higher amplitude than complex pictures, but no complexity effect was found for negative pictures. No hemisphere-related interaction effect was found at both EPN and LPP. Maximum peak-to-peak difference amplitudes of delta at parietal area demonstrated significant effect of valence, but no significant effect of perceptual complexity was found. Negative pictures showed higher amplitude than neutral and positive pictures. The findings suggest that both LPP and EPN components are modulated by perceptual complexity as well as valence of affective pictures, but perceptual complexity effect can be attenuated or eliminated by negative valence. Delta frequency elicited by parietal area seems to be related with LPP, but contributes to only valence effect. Overall results suggest the motivational importance and priority of processing of negative stimuli.

keywords
IAPS, affective valence, perceptual complexity, LPP, EPN, delta frequency, 국제정서사진체계(IAPS), 정서가, 지각적 복잡성, LPP, EPN, delta

참고문헌

1.

김희은 (2012). 정서가, 각성수준 및 지각적 복잡성과 정서처리속도의 관계. 전남대학교 석사학위 청구논문.

2.

박태진, 박선희 (2009). IAPS 자극에 대한 한국 대학생의 정서 평가. 인지과학, 20, 183- 195.

3.

Balconi, M., & Pozzoli, U. (2009). Arousal effect on emotional face comprehension: Frequency band changes in different time intervals. Physiology and Behavior, 97, 455-562.

4.

Başar, E., Başar-Erogly, C., Rosen, B., & Schutt, A. (1984). A new approach to endogenous event-related potentials in man: relation between EEG and P300 wave. International Journal of Neuroscience, 26, 161-180.

5.

Bradley, M. M. (2009). Natural selective attention: Orienting and emotion. Psychophysiology, 46, 1-11.

6.

Bradley, M. M., Codispoti, M., Cuthbert, B. N., & Lang, P. J. (2001) Emotion and motivation I: defensive and appetitive reactions in picture processing. Emotion, 1, 276-298.

7.

Bradley, M. M., Hamby, S., Löw, A., & Lang, P. J. (2007). Brain potentials in perception: Picture complexity and emotional arousal. Psychophysiology, 44, 364-373.

8.

Calvo, M. G., & Avero, P. (2009). Reaction time normative data for the IAPS as a function of display time gender and picture. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 184-191.

9.

Cuthbert, B. N, Schupp, H. T, Bradley, M. M, Birbaumer, N., & Lang, P. J. (2000). Brain potentials in affective picture processing: covariation with autonomic arousal and affective report. Biological Psychology, 52, 95-111.

10.

Delplanque, S., N'diaye, K., Scherer, K., & Grandjean, D. (2007). Spatial frequencies or emotional effects? A systematic measure of spatial frequencies for IAPS pictures by a discrete wavelet analysis. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 165, 144-150.

11.

Feldman, L. A. (1995). Valence Focus and Arousal Focus: Individual Differences in the Structure of Affective Experience. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 153-166.

12.

Gratton, G., Coles, M. G. H., & Donchin, E. (1983). A new method for off-line removal of ocular artifact. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neuropsysiology, 55-4, 468-484.

13.

Güntekin, B., & Başar, E. (2010). Event-related beta oscillations are affected by emotional eliciting stimuli. Neuroscience Letters, 483, 173-178.

14.

Intriligator, J., & Polich, J. (1995). On the relationship between EEG and ERP variability. International Journal of Psychology, 20, 59-74.

15.

Ito, T. A., Larsen, J. T., Smith, N. K., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1998). Negative information weighs more heavily on the brain: the negativity bias in evaluative categorizations. Journal of Personality Social Psychology, 75, 887-900.

16.

Junghöfer, M., Bradley, M. M., Elbert, T. R., & Lang, P. J. (2001). Fleeting images: A new look at early emotion discrimination. Psychophysiology, 38, 175-178.

17.

Karakas S., Erzengin O. U., & Başar E. (2000a). A new strategy involving multiple cognitive paradigms demonstrate that ERP components are determined by the superposition of oscillatory responses. Clinical Neurophysiology, 111, 1719-1732.

18.

Karakas S., Erzengin O. U., & Başar E. (2000b). The genesis of human event-related responses explained through the theory of oscillatory neural assembles. Neuroscience Letters, 285, 45-48.

19.

Knyazev, G. G., Slobodskoj-Plusnin, J. Y., & Bocharov, A. V. (2009). Event related delta synchronization during explicit and implicit emotion processing. Neuroscience, 164, 1800- 1600.

20.

Lang, P. J, Bradley. M. M., & Cuthbert. B. N. (1997). International Affective Picture System (IAPS): Technical manual and affective ratings. NIMH center for the study of emotion and attention.

21.

Lang, P. J, Bradley. M. M., & Cuthbert. B. N. (2005). International Affective Picture System (IAPS): Affective ratings of Pictures and instruction manual. Technical Report A-6. University of Florida, Gainesville. FL.

22.

Lang, P. J, Bradley. M. M., & Cuthbert. B. N. (2008). International Affective Picture System (IAPS): Affective ratings of Pictures and instruction manual. Technical Report A-8. University of Florida, Gainesville. FL.

23.

Nordström, H., & Wiens, S. (2012). Emotional event-related potentials are larger to figures than scenes but are similarly reduced by inattention. BMC Neuroscience, 13:49.

24.

Olofsson, J. K., Nordin, S., Sequeira, H., & Polich, J. (2008). Affective picture processing: An integrative review of ERP findings. Biological Psychology, 77, 247-265.

25.

Pfurtscheller, G., & Lopes da Silva, F. H. (1999). Event-related EEG/MEG synchronization and desynchronization: basic principles. Clinical Neurophysiology, 110, 1842-1857.

26.

Reisenzein, R. (1994). Pleasure-Arousal theory and the intensity of emotions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1313-1329.

27.

Roschke, J., & Fell, J. (1997). Spectral analysis of P300, generation in depression and schizophrenia. Neuropsychobiology, 35, 108-114.

28.

Rozenkrants, B., & Polich, J. (2008). Affective ERP processing in a visual oddball task: Arousal, valence, and gender. Clinical Neurophysiology, 119, 2260-2265.

29.

Sabatinelli, D., Lang, P. J., Keil, A., & Bradley, M. M. (2007). Emotional perception: Correlation of functional MRI and event- related potentials. Cerebral Cortex, 17, 1085- 1091.

30.

Schupp, H. T., Cuthbert, B. N., Bradley, M. M., Cacioppo, J. T., Ito, T., & Lang, P. J. (2000). Affective picture processing: The late positive potential is modulated by motivational relevance. Psychophysiology, 37, 257-261.

31.

Schupp, H. T., Flaisch, T., Stockburger, J., & Junghöfer, M. (2006). Emotion and attention: Event-related brain potential studies. In S. Anders, G. Ende, M. Junghöfer, J. Kissler, & D. Wildgruber (Eds.), Progress in brain research: Understanding emotions, vol. 156 (pp.31-51). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Elsevier.

32.

Schupp, H. T., Junghöfer, M., Weike, A., & Hamm, A. O. (2003). Emotional facilitation of sensory processing in the visual cortex. Psychological Science, 14, 7-13.

33.

Schupp, H. T., Junghöfer, M., Weike, A., & Hamm, A. O. (2004). The selective processing of briefly presented affective pictures: An ERP analysis. Psychophysiology, 41, 441-449.

34.

Schurmann, M., Başar-Eroglu, C., Kolev, V., & Başar, E. (2001). Delta responses and cognitive processing: single-trial evaluations of human visual P300. International Journal of Psychology, 39, 229-239.

35.

Wiens, S, Molapour, T, Overfeld, J, & Sand, A. (2012). High negative valence does not protect emotional event-related potentials from spatial inattention and perceptual load. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 12, 151-160.

36.

Wiens, S, Sand, A, Olofsson, J. K. (2011). Nonemotional features suppress early and enhance late emotional electrocortical responses to negative pictures. Bioloical Psychology, 86, 83-89.

한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물

논문 투고 OA 정책