Imaging emotional brain functions: conceptual and methodological issues

This article reviews the psychophysiological and brain imaging literature on emotional brain function from a methodological point of view. The difficulties in defining, operationalising and measuring emotional activation and, in particular, aversive learning will be considered. Emotion is a response of the organism during an episode of major significance and involves physiological activation, motivational, perceptual, evaluative and learning processes, motor expression, action tendencies and monitoring/subjective feelings. Despite the advances in assessing the physiological correlates of emotional perception and learning processes, a critical appraisal shows that functional neuroimaging approaches encounter methodological difficulties regarding measurement precision (e.g., response scaling and reproducibility) and validity (e.g., response specificity, generalisation to other paradigms, subjects or settings). Since emotional processes are not only the result of localised but also of widely distributed activation, a more representative model of assessment is needed that systematically relates the hierarchy of high- and low-level emotion constructs with the corresponding patterns of activity and functional connectivity of the brain.

Incidental task sequence learning: perceptual rather than conceptual?

In four experiments we investigated whether incidental task sequence learning occurs when no instructional task cues are available (i.e. with univalent stimuli). We manipulated task sequence by presenting three simple binary-choice tasks (colour, form or letter case decisions) in regular repeated or random order. Participants were required to use the same two response keys for each of the tasks. We manipulated response sequence by ordering the stimuli so as to produce either a regular or a random order of left versus right-hand key presses. When sequencing in both, or either, separate stream (i.e. task sequence and/or response sequence) was changed to random, only those participants who had processed both sequences together showed evidence of sequence learning in terms of significant response time disruption (Experiments 1-3). This effect disappeared when the sequences were uncorrelated (Experiment 4). The results indicate that only the correlated integration of task sequence and response sequence produced a reliable incidental learning effect. As this effect depends on the predictable ordering of stimulus categories, it suggests that task sequence learning is perceptual rather than conceptual in nature.

Decomposing intuitive components in a conceptual problem solving task

Research into intuitive problem solving has shown that objective closeness of participants' hypotheses were closer to the accurate solution than their subjective ratings of closeness. After separating conceptually intuitive problem solving from the solutions of rational incremental tasks and of sudden insight tasks, we replicated this finding by using more precise measures in a conceptual problem-solving task. In a second study, we distinguished performance level, processing style, implicit knowledge and subjective feeling of closeness to the solution within the problem-solving task and examined the relationships of these different components with measures of intelligence and personality. Verbal intelligence correlated with performance level in problem solving, but not with processing style and implicit knowledge. Faith in intuition, openness to experience, and conscientiousness correlated with processing style, but not with implicit knowledge. These findings suggest that one needs to decompose processing style and intuitive components in problem solving to make predictions on effects of intelligence and personality measures.