Advertisement

Experimental Brain Research

, Volume 234, Issue 11, pp 3107–3118 | Cite as

Putting the brakes on the brakes: negative emotion disrupts cognitive control network functioning and alters subsequent stopping ability

  • Tara K. PattersonEmail author
  • Agatha Lenartowicz
  • Elliot T. Berkman
  • Danni Ji
  • Russell A. Poldrack
  • Barbara J. Knowlton
Research Article

Abstract

The ability to inhibit unwanted responses is critical for effective control of behavior, and inhibition failures can have disastrous consequences in real-world situations. Here, we examined how prior exposure to negative emotional stimuli affects the response-stopping network. Participants performed the stop-signal task, which relies on inhibitory control processes, after they viewed blocks of either negatively emotional or neutral images. In Experiment 1, we found that neural activity was reduced following negative image viewing. When participants were required to inhibit responding after neutral image viewing, we observed activation consistent with previous studies using the stop-signal task. However, when participants were required to inhibit responding after negative image viewing, we observed reductions in the activation of ventrolateral prefrontal cortex, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, medial frontal cortex, and parietal cortex. Furthermore, analysis of neural connectivity during stop-signal task blocks indicated that across participants, emotion-induced changes in behavioral performance were associated with changes in functional connectivity, such that greater behavioral impairment after negative image viewing was associated with greater weakening of connectivity. In Experiment 2, we collected behavioral data from a larger sample of participants and found that stopping performance was impaired after negative image viewing, as seen in longer stop-signal reaction times. The present results demonstrate that negative emotional events can prospectively disrupt the neural network supporting response inhibition.

Keywords

Cognitive control Emotion Functional connectivity Mood Prefrontal cortex Neural network 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by a National Science Foundation graduate research fellowship to T. K. Patterson (DGE-0707424), start-up funds provided by the University of Oregon to E. T. Berkman, a James S. McDonnell Foundation grant to R. A. Poldrack, and a National Science Foundation grant to B. J. Knowlton (BCS-0848246). We thank Lauren Skellern, Darren Liu, Chloe Su, and Carolyn Prina for assistance with data collection and Katherine Misogas for assistance with data analysis. We also thank Jeanette Mumford for advising on the neuroimaging analyses.

Compliance with ethical standards

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.

Supplementary material

221_2016_4709_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (90 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 89 kb)

References

  1. Anderson AK (2005) Affective influences on the attentional dynamics supporting awareness. J Exp Psychol Gen 134:258–281CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Andersson JLR, Jenkinson M, Smith SM (2007a) Non-linear optimisation. FMRIB technical report TR07JA1. FMRIB Centre, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  3. Andersson JLR, Jenkinson M, Smith SM (2007b) Non-linear registration aka spatial normalisation. FMRIB technical report TR07JA2. FMRIB Centre, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  4. Aron AR, Fletcher PC, Bullmore ET, Sahakian BJ, Robbins TW (2003) Stop-signal inhibition disrupted by damage to right inferior frontal gyrus in humans. Nat Neurosci 6:115–116CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Aron AR, Robbins TW, Poldrack RA (2004) Inhibition and the right inferior frontal cortex. Trends Cognit Sci 8:170–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Aron AR, Robbins TW, Poldrack RA (2014) Inhibition and the right inferior frontal cortex: one decade on. Trends Cognit Sci 18:177–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Band GPH, van der Molen MW, Logan GD (2003) Horse-race model simulations of the stop-signal procedure. Acta Psychol 112:105–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Beckmann CF, Jenkinson M, Smith SM (2003) General multilevel linear modeling for group analysis in FMRI. Neuroimage 20:1052–1063CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Berkman ET, Burklund L, Lieberman MD (2009) Inhibitory spillover: intentional motor inhibition produces incidental limbic inhibition via right inferior frontal cortex. Neuroimage 47:705–712CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. Chamberlain SR, Hampshire A, Muller U, Rubia K, del Campo N, Craig K, Regenthal R, Suckling J, Roiser JP, Grant JE, Bullmore ET, Robbins TW, Sahakian BJ (2009) Atomoxetine modulates right inferior frontal activation during inhibitory control: a pharmacological functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Biol Psychiatry 65:550–555CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Chambers CD, Bellgrove MA, Stokes MG, Henderson TR, Garavan H, Robertson IH, Morris AP, Mattingley JB (2006) Executive “brake failure” following deactivation of human frontal lobe. J Cognit Neurosci 18:444–455Google Scholar
  12. Chambers CD, Garavan H, Bellgrove MA (2009) Insights into the neural basis of response inhibition from cognitive and clinical neuroscience. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 33:631–646CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Chepenik LG, Cornew LA, Farah MJ (2007) The influence of sad mood on cognition. Emotion 7:802–811CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Cohen JR, Berkman ET, Lieberman MD (2013) Intentional and incidental self-control in ventrolateral prefrontal cortex. In: Stuss DT, Knight RT (eds) Principles of frontal lobe function, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 417–440Google Scholar
  15. Dan-Glauser ES, Gross JJ (2011) The temporal dynamics of two response-focused forms of emotion regulation: experiential, expressive, and autonomic consequences. Psychophysiology 48:1309–1322CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. De Houwer J, Tibboel H (2010) Stop what you are not doing! Emotional pictures interfere with the task not to respond. Psychon Bull Rev 17:699–703CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Friston KJ, Buechel C, Fink GR, Morris J, Rolls E, Dolan RJ (1997) Psychophysiological and modulatory interactions in neuroimaging. Neuroimage 6:218–229CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Hartikainen KM, Siiskonen AR, Ogawa KH (2012) Threat interferes with response inhibition. NeuroReport 23:447–450CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Jenkinson M, Smith S (2001) A global optimisation method for robust affine registration of brain images. Med Image Anal 5:143–156CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Jenkinson M, Bannister P, Brady M, Smith S (2002) Improved optimization for the robust and accurate linear registration and motion correction of brain images. Neuroimage 17:825–841CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Kalanthroff E, Cohen N, Henik A (2013) Stop feeling: inhibition of emotional interference following stop-signal trials. Front Hum Neurosci 7:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lane RD, Chua PML, Dolan RJ (1999) Common effects of emotional valence, arousal and attention on neural activation during visual processing of pictures. Neuropsychologia 37:989–997CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Lang PJ, Bradley MM, Cuthbert BN (2008) International affective picture system (IAPS): affective ratings of pictures and instruction manual. Technical report A-8. University of Florida, GainsvilleGoogle Scholar
  24. Lenartowicz A, Verbruggen F, Logan GD, Poldrack RA (2011) Inhibition-related activation in the right inferior frontal gyrus in the absence of inhibitory cues. J Cognit Neurosci 23:3388–3399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lindstrom BR, Bohlin G (2012) Threat-relevance impairs executive functions: negative impact on working memory and response inhibition. Emotion 12:384–393CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Logan GD (1994) On the ability to inhibit thought and action: a users’ guide to the stop signal paradigm. In: Dagenbach D, Carr TH (eds) Inhibitory processes in attention, memory, and language. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 189–239Google Scholar
  27. Logan GD, Cowan WB (1984) On the ability to inhibit thought and action: a theory of an act of control. Psychol Rev 91:295–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. McLaren DG, Ries ML, Xu G, Johnson SC (2012) A generalized form of context-dependent psychophysiological interactions (gPPI): a comparison to standard approaches. Neuroimage 61:1277–1286CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. Ochsner KN (2000) Are affective events richly recollected or simply familiar? The experience and process of recognizing feelings past. J Exp Psychol Gen 129:242–261CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. O’Reilly JX, Woolrich MW, Behrens TEJ, Smith SM, Johansen-Berg H (2012) Tools of the trade: psychophysiological interactions and functional connectivity. Soc Cognit Affect Neurosci 7:604–609CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pawliczek CM, Derntl B, Kellermann T, Kohn N, Gur RC, Habel U (2013) Inhibitory control and trait aggression: neural and behavioral insights using the emotional stop signal task. Neuroimage 79:264–274CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Pessoa L (2009) How do emotion and motivation direct executive control? Trends Cognit Sci 13:160–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Pessoa L, Padmala S, Kenzer A, Bauer A (2012) Interactions between cognition and emotion during response inhibition. Emotion 12:192–197CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Rebetez MML, Rochat L, Billieux J, Gay P, Van der Linden M (2015) Do emotional stimuli interfere with two distinct components of inhibition? Cognit Emot 29:559–567CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sagaspe P, Schwartz S, Vuilleumier P (2011) Fear and stop: a role for the amygdala in motor inhibition by emotional signals. Neuroimage 55:1825–1835CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Smallwood J, Fitzgerald A, Miles LK, Phillips LH (2009) Shifting moods, wandering minds: negative moods lead the mind to wander. Emotion 9:271–276CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Smith SM (2002) Fast robust automated brain extraction. Hum Brain Mapp 17:143–155CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Stockdale LA, Morrison RG, Kmiecik MJ, Garbarino J, Silton RL (2015) Emotionally anesthetized: media violence induces neural changes during emotional face processing. Soc Cognit Affect Neurosci 10:1373–1382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Tabibnia G, Monterosso JR, Baicy K, Aron AR, Poldrack RA, Chakrapani S, Lee B, London ED (2011) Different forms of self-control share a neurocognitive substrate. J Neurosci 31:4805–4810CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  40. Verbruggen F, De Houwer J (2007) Do emotional stimuli interfere with response inhibition? Evidence from the stop signal paradigm. Cognit Emot 21:391–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Verbruggen F, Logan GD (2008a) Automatic and controlled response inhibition: associative learning in the go/no-go and stop-signal paradigms. J Exp Psychol Gen 137:649–672CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  42. Verbruggen F, Logan GD (2008b) Response inhibition in the stop-signal paradigm. Trends Cognit Sci 12:418–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Vuilleumier P (2005) How brains beware: neural mechanisms of emotional attention. Trends Cognit Sci 9:585–594CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Woolrich M (2008) Robust group analysis using outlier inference. Neuroimage 41:286–301CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Woolrich MW, Ripley BD, Brady M, Smith SM (2001) Temporal autocorrelation in univariate linear modeling of FMRI data. Neuroimage 14:1370–1386CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Woolrich MW, Behrens TEJ, Beckmann CF, Jenkinson M, Smith SM (2004) Multilevel linear modelling for FMRI group analysis using Bayesian inference. Neuroimage 21:1732–1747CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Worsley KJ (2001) Statistical analysis of activation images. In: Jezzard P, Matthews PM, Smith SM (eds) Functional MRI: an introduction to methods. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 251–270Google Scholar
  48. Yu JX, Hung DL, Tseng P, Tzeng OJL, Muggleton NG, Juan CH (2012) Sex differences in how erotic and painful stimuli impair inhibitory control. Cognition 124:251–255CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of California, Los AngelesLos AngelesUSA
  2. 2.Semel Neuropsychiatric InstituteUniversity of California, Los AngelesLos AngelesUSA
  3. 3.Department of PsychologyUniversity of OregonEugeneUSA
  4. 4.Department of PsychologyStanford UniversityStanfordUSA

Personalised recommendations