Valence matters: An electrophysiological study on how emotions influence cognitive performance in children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Emotional stimuli have been found to influence cognitive performance in children, but it is not clear whether this effect varies with the cognitive demands of the task. In this study, we examined how emotional expressions influenced cognitive performance and event-related potentials (ERPs) in early and middle childhood under varying cognitive control demands. Two groups of children (4.5-6.0 and 7.0-8.5 years) completed a modified flanker task where the stimuli were faces displaying task-irrelevant emotional expressions. Emotional influence varied depending on emotional valence: Accuracy was greater for happy targets, while response time and N2 latency were longer for angry targets. In younger children only, angry targets elicited a larger late frontal negativity. Cognitive control demands did not modulate the effect of emotions on behavioral performance or ERPs, contrasting with findings in adults. Findings are discussed in relation to the dual competition model and previous work demonstrating a positivity bias in children.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".