Morality or competence is more important? The effect of evaluation dimensions on ERP responses to neutral faces depends on contextual valence and self-relevance.

Recent studies have shown that the processing of neutral facial expressions could be modulated by the valence and self-relevance of preceding verbal evaluations. However, these studies have not distinguished the dimension (i.e., morality and competence) from verbal evaluations. In fact, there is a hot controversy about whether morality or competence receives more weight. Therefore, using the ERP technique, the current study aimed to address this issue by comparing the influence of morality and competence evaluations on behavioral and neural responses to neutral facial expressions when these evaluations varied with contextual valence and self-relevance. Our ERP results revealed that the early EPN amplitudes were larger for neutral faces after receiving evaluations about self relative to evaluations about senders. Moreover, the EPN was more negative after a competence evaluation relative to a morality evaluation when these evaluations were positive, while this effect was absent when these evaluations were negative. The late LPP was larger after a morality evaluation compared to a competence evaluation when these evaluations were negative and directed to self. However, no significant LPP effect between morality and competence evaluations was observed when these evaluations were positive. The present study extended previous studies by showing that early and late processing stages of faces are affected by the evaluation dimension in a top-down manner and further modulated by contextual valence and self-relevance.

Contextual valence influences the neural dynamics of time and magnitude representation during feedback evaluation.

Contextual valence is an important dimension during value-based decision-making. Previous research has revealed behavioral and neural asymmetries between the gain context and the loss context. The present event-related potential study investigated the effects of contextual valence on neural dynamics underlying magnitude and time, two important reward dimensions, during feedback evaluation. Forty-two participants performed a simple guessing task in which they experienced both a gain context wherein high or low rewards were delivered immediately or six months later, and a loss context wherein high or low losses were delivered in the same way. Results showed that in the gain context, time and magnitude information were processed in a parallel way during the time windows of the reward positivity (RewP) and the P3. In the loss context, however, time and magnitude information were processed in a serial way such that time information was encoded during the RewP and P3 periods, whereas magnitude information was not tracked until the time window of the late positive potential. Our findings suggest that the neural dynamics underlying time and magnitude information are distinct between the gain and loss contexts, thus providing a novel perspective for the well-known gain-loss asymmetry.

The effect of emotional and self-referential contexts on ERP responses towards surprised faces.

The perception of surprised faces is demonstrably modulated by emotional context. However, the influence of self-relevance and its interaction with emotional context have not been explored. The present study investigated the effects of contextual valence and self-reference on the perception of surprised faces. Our results revealed that faces in a negative context elicited a larger N170 than those in a neutral context. The EPN was affected by the interaction between contextual valence and self-reference, with larger amplitudes for faces in self-related positive contexts and sender-related negative contexts. Additionally, LPP amplitudes were enhanced for faces in negative contexts relative to neutral and positive contexts, as well as for self-related contexts in comparison to sender-related contexts. Together, these findings help to elucidate the psychophysiological mechanisms underlying the effects of emotional and self-referential contexts on the perception of surprised faces, which are characterized by distinctive ERPs.

Reward processing in gain versus loss context: An ERP study.

Previous research has shown that consummatory ERP components are sensitive to contextual valence. The present study investigated the contextual valence effect across anticipatory and consummatory phases by requiring participants to play a simple gambling task during a gain context and a loss context. During the anticipatory phase, the cue-P3 was more positive in the gain context compared to the loss context, whereas the stimulus-preceding negativity (SPN) was comparable across the two contexts. With respect to the consummatory phase, the feedback-related negativity (FRN) in response to the zero-value outcome was more negative in the gain versus loss context, whereas the feedback P3 (fb-P3) in response to the zero-value outcome was insensitive to contextual valence. These findings suggest that contextual valence effect occurs at a relative early stage of both the reward anticipation and consumption. Moreover, across the gain and loss contexts, the SPN was selectively correlated with the FRN, whereas the cue-P3 was selectively associated with the fb-P3, pointing to a close association between the anticipatory and consummatory phases in reward dynamics.

Contextual valence modulates the neural dynamics of risk processing.

A well-known bias in risky decision making is that most people tend to be risk averse when gains are salient but risk seeking when losses are salient. The present study addressed the neural dynamics of this process by recording ERPs during a gambling task in a gain and a loss context. Behaviorally, participants were found to be risk averse in the gain context but risk neutral in the loss context. During the anticipation stage, an increased stimulus-preceding negativity was elicited by high- versus low-risk choices in the gain but not the loss context. During the outcome-appraisal stage, the feedback-related negativity was larger after high- versus low-risk choices in the gain instead of the loss context. For the P300, an outcome valence effect (a larger P300 for gain vs. loss outcomes) emerged following the high- versus low-risk decisions in the gain but not the loss context. Our findings suggest that risk processing can be modulated by the context of valence during the anticipation stage and by both the contextual valence and the outcome valence during the outcome-appraisal stage, which may be driven by the motivational salience imposed by the context of valence.