Emotion
2009, Vol. 9, No. 4, 510 –519
© 2009 American Psychological Association
1528-3542/09/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/a0016299
Effects of Emotionally Contagious Films on Changes in HemisphereSpecific Cognitive Performance
Ilona Papousek, Günter Schulter, and Brigitte Lang
Karl-Franzens University of Graz
In the framework of models on the lateralized involvement of the cortical hemispheres in affect and
psychopathology, the authors examined whether cognitive processes associated with the left and the right
prefrontal cortex varied as a function of valence, motivational direction, or intensity of induced mood.
Affective states (cheerfulness, anxiety, sadness, anger, and neutral mood) were experimentally induced
by short “emotionally contagious films.” Findings confirmed that the newly developed films were
suitable to effectively elicit the expected affective states and to differentially change the dimensions of
interest. Changes in verbal versus figural fluency performance were examined as a function of positive
versus negative valence, approach versus withdrawal motivation, and low versus high emotional arousal.
Level of interest was evaluated as a control. Both the tendency to withdraw and emotional arousal seemed
to produce relative advantages for cognitive processes that are more strongly represented in the right than
left prefrontal cortex. Findings suggest that changes in cognitive performance might be best explained by
an additive combination of motivational direction and arousal.
Keywords: hemispheric asymmetry, affect, cognition, mood induction, fluency
tions (Gray, 2001; Gray, Braver, & Raichle, 2002). Alternatively,
increase of cortical activation by emotional processes may spread
out to circuits involved in certain cognitive processes (see Drake,
2004, and Papousek & Schulter, 2004, for summaries of evidence
of an overflow of activation into related areas). It has been suggested that the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex may be an important
site of integration between affective and cognitive processes
(Davidson, 2000; Gray, 2001; Mitchell & Phillips, 2007). In the
models on functional brain asymmetry in emotion, which form the
background of the present study, special importance is attached to
asymmetries of the prefrontal cortex, above all the dorsolateral
prefrontal cortex (Papousek & Schulter, 2002).
Examining the basic underlying dimensions of emotional experience seems essential to advance scientific progress in the field
(Heller, Koven, & Miller, 2003). Mainly three dimensions are
potentially relevant in this context: Valence (from pleasant to
unpleasant), motivational direction (from approach to withdrawal),
and emotional arousal (intensity of affect, from calm to excited). In
different models, different dimensions have been considered as
particularly important.
The valence model suggests that right prefrontal cortex is specialized for unpleasant affect, and left prefrontal cortex for pleasant affect (e.g., Heller & Nitschke, 1998). Consequently, unpleasant affect is expected to be accompanied by the tendency to more
strongly activate right than left prefrontal cortex, and pleasant
affect by the opposite pattern of asymmetry. The motivational
direction model posits that prefrontal cortex may be involved in
approach- and withdrawal-related motivational tendencies (e.g.,
Davidson, 1992; Harmon-Jones, 2004a). According to this model,
it is expected that withdrawal-related affect is associated with
relatively greater right than left prefrontal activity, and approachrelated affect with relatively greater activity of left than right
prefrontal cortex. However, as most unpleasant emotions are accompanied by withdrawal tendencies, effects of valence and mo-
Despite a large body of literature addressing lateralized involvement of the cortical hemispheres in affect and psychopathology
(e.g., Davidson, 1992; Heller, 1993), relatively little is known
regarding the implications for functional lateralization (Papousek
& Schulter, 2006). Investigation of specific mood-dependent cognitive changes may add important evidence about functional processes that are related to the activation asymmetries observed in
electroencephalogram (EEG) and neuroimaging studies (Gray,
2004).
It is generally accepted that affective and cognitive systems
work hand in hand and that their integrated operation is necessary
for adaptive functioning (e.g., Davidson, 2000; Ochsner & Phelps,
2007). There is also evidence that higher cognitive processes can
be affected by positive or negative emotional states in a beneficial
or a detrimental way, and patients with depression or anxiety
disorders show various cognitive abnormalities (for reviews see,
e.g., Levin, Heller, Mohanty, Herrington, & Miller, 2007; Mitchell
& Phillips, 2007). It seems likely that reciprocal connections
between brain circuits involved in affect and cognition exist (Drevets & Raichle, 1998; Northoff et al., 2004). More specifically, it
was speculated that affective and cognitive processes may share
certain more general functions, and that affect and cognition may
influence each other at the stage of these more elementary func-
Ilona Papousek, Günter Schulter, and Brigitte Lang, Department of
Psychology, Karl-Franzens University of Graz.
The ECOFs were developed and produced with the cooperation of Eva
Kogler, Andrea Zitzenbacher, and Bernadette Pusswald (actress). We thank
them for their great work.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Ilona
Papousek, Karl-Franzens University of Graz, Department of Psychology,
Univ.-Platz 2, A-8010 Graz, Austria. E-Mail: [email protected]
510
EMOTIONALLY CONTAGIOUS FILMS
tivational direction are inseparably confounded in most studies,
and, consequently, the same research results were interpreted as
supporting the valence model by some researchers and as supporting the motivational direction model by others. Occasionally, the
two dimensions were in fact equated, with right prefrontal cortex
proposed to be involved in “negative withdrawal related” and left
prefrontal cortex in “positive approach related” affect (e.g.,
Davidson, 1988). To disentangle valence and motivational direction, it is useful to examine not only depressive or anxious moods
but also anger, which is considered an unpleasant affect with
approach motivational tendencies (Harmon-Jones, 2004b). Results
from studies with anger suggest that the motivational direction
dimension might explain more variance of dorsolateral frontal
asymmetry than affective valence (e.g., Harmon-Jones & Allen,
1998; but see Stewart, Levin-Silton, Sass, Heller, & Miller, 2008).
Finally, the right hemisphere model maintains that the right
hemisphere is generally specialized for the experience of affect,
regardless of valence or motivational direction (e.g., Borod, 1992;
Gainotti, 2000). This model has been based mainly on changes
observed after brain damage, but there is also evidence from
studies with healthy individuals that has been interpreted in favor
of this model. It can be tested by examining emotional arousal, for
instance, by comparing states with low versus high intensity of
(any) affect or by comparing positive and negative conditions to a
neutral one. It was reported, for example, that participants with
relatively greater activation of right than left hemisphere reported
more intense affect after presentation of emotionally evocative
films, irrespective of valence (Hagemann, Hewig, Naumann,
Seifert, & Bartussek, 2005). The role of arousal is explicitly taken
into account in Heller’s circumplex model (Heller, 1993; Heller et
al., 2003). However, compared with the valence and motivational
direction models, relatively few experimental studies to date have
focused on lateralized cortical correlates of varying degrees of
intensity of affect.
Furthermore, in many studies valence or motivational direction
has been confounded with intensity of emotional arousal. As it
generally seems more difficult to induce positive than negative
mood states (Westerman, Spies, Stahl, & Hesse, 1996), in many
studies the positive mood conditions may have been associated
with lower intensity of affect than the negative ones. In such cases,
if there is no comparable neutral condition (i.e., a condition with
generally low emotional arousal), no inferences can be drawn
about whether changes in activation asymmetry are really because
of valence or actually of differences in (unspecific) emotional
arousal. The same problem arises if a neutral condition is compared with a negative one and no comparable positive mood
condition is implemented. It has been suggested, therefore, that if
researchers are interested in the effects of valence as opposed to
arousal, the intensities of elicited positive and negative responses
should be equated (e.g., Wager, Phan, Liberzon, & Taylor, 2003).
However, this can be difficult, for instance, because some mood
states are intrinsically associated with lower emotional arousal
than others (see, e.g., Faith & Thayer, 2001). Unfortunately, a
completely crossed experimental design is also impossible. The
valence and arousal dimensions are not entirely independent, because emotions at the lower end of the arousal dimension vary
considerably less on the valence dimension than emotions located
at the higher end of the arousal dimension (Lang, Bradley, &
Cuthbert, 1998). Moreover, no positive emotions with withdrawal
511
motivational tendencies seem to exist. Nevertheless, attempts to
disentangle the effects of the different emotional dimensions seem
to be valuable, even if it might not be possible to accomplish the
task in a perfect way.
When exploring interrelationships between affective and cognitive processes based on laterality models of affect, it is of particular interest to examine whether specific affective states may
selectively enhance or impair functions that are asymmetrically
represented in the cortical hemispheres, that is, whether they may
affect some cognitive functions but not others. In fact, empirical
results demonstrated that putatively left- and right-hemispheric
cognitive performances changed after the induction of positive and
negative mood states (Bartolic, Basso, Schefft, Glauser, & TitanicSchefft, 1999; Gray, 2001). The findings of these studies corresponded to expectations. Specifically, better left than right hemisphere performance was observed after the induction of positive
mood and better right than left hemisphere performance was
observed after negative mood induction. However, although these
studies yielded important evidence, it could not be determined
whether the cognitive laterality effects were because of changes of
valence, motivational direction, or arousal. In neither of these
studies were comparisons of positive and negative mood conditions with neutral (baseline) measures reported, and in both studies
altered mood states were induced by manipulations with strong
cognitive components (statements, stories of films). Findings of
another study may be seen as additional evidence of interconnections between emotional factors, cognitive functions, and lateralized prefrontal activity (Herrington et al., 2005), but cannot be
interpreted unequivocally from a laterality research point of view.
Whereas Gray (2001) observed hemisphere specific cognitive
performance by using working memory tasks, Bartolic et al.
(1999) used fluency tasks (verbal vs. figural fluency). For both
fluency tasks there is good evidence that relative changes in
performance may be specifically and sensitively related to changes
of phasic activation asymmetry in the prefrontal cortex.1 Several
studies have shown that phonemic verbal fluency tasks are sensitive to dysfunction of left frontal brain regions (see, e.g., Henry &
Crawford, 2004 for a meta-analysis) and figural fluency tasks to
dysfunction of right anterior brain regions (e.g., Baldo, Shimamura, Delis, Kramer, & Kaplan, 2001; Lee et al., 1997; Ruff,
Allen, Farrow, Niemann, & Wylie, 1994). In addition, positron
emissions tomography (PET), functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), and EEG studies confirmed that phonemic fluency
tasks predominantly engage regions in the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in normal volunteers (Elfgren & Risberg, 1998;
Friedman et al., 1998; Frith, Friston, Liddle, & Frackowiak, 1991;
Gaillard et al., 2000; Pujol et al., 1996). An EEG study in healthy
subjects demonstrated that performance on a figural fluency task
was better when right frontal regions were more active (Foster,
Williamson, & Harrison, 2005). Similarly, better verbal fluency
performance was related to greater asymmetry in favor of left than
right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (Papousek & Schulter, 2004).
Findings from several investigations also demonstrated more generally that regionally specific lateralized activation of brain regions
putatively relevant to a task is associated with better task performance (Davidson, Chapman, Chapman, & Henriques, 1990; Gur et
1
Evidence on working memory tasks is reviewed in Gray (2001).
512
PAPOUSEK, SCHULTER, AND LANG
al., 1994, 2000; Gur & Reivich, 1980; Wendt & Risberg, 1994).
Therefore, it can be assumed that if activation asymmetry in a
prefrontal cortical area is changed by mood manipulation, this will
enhance performance of tasks that primarily depend on this or a
related area of the more active hemisphere. More specifically,
based on the models outlined above, it can be predicted that
negative or withdrawal-related affective states or high emotional
arousal would be accompanied by an increase in figural relative to
verbal fluency performance. Pleasant or approach-related affective
states or low emotional arousal should be accompanied by an
increase in verbal relative to figural fluency performance.
For several reasons, it is important to analyze relative verbal
versus figural fluency performance. First, changes of absolute
performance on a task may be influenced by many additional
factors (e.g., tiredness or distraction). Thus, in most cases absolute
performance of one task alone is not suitable to indicate changes in
the absolute activation level of the task-relevant region in one
hemisphere. However, as it can be assumed that the general factors
influence all performance equally, relative changes of activation
asymmetry should still affect relative changes of left to right
hemisphere cognitive performance. Second, both in connection
with cognition (performance on hemisphere-specific tasks; Davidson et al., 1990; Gur et al., 1994) and emotion (Heller, Nitschke,
Etienne, & Miller, 1997) it was concluded that the relative difference in activation between the hemispheres is more important than,
for instance, the level of left-hemisphere activation per se. (That is,
no effect of left-hemisphere activation can be expected if the right
hemisphere is activated, too.) Consequently, relationships to other
variables often cannot be observed if only absolute activity at
individual sites is examined and data of the left and the right
hemisphere are not related to each other (see, e.g., Blackhart &
Kline, 2005; Papousek & Schulter, 2004). For these reasons, if
laterality is the focus of interest, findings of studies examining
effects of mood on verbal fluency performance only (i.e., without
relating it to nonverbal performance) cannot be interpreted unequivocally (e.g., Clark, Iversen, & Goodwin, 2001; Phillips, Bull,
Adams, & Fraser, 2002). In this case, it cannot be determined
whether the mood manipulation may have induced a change in
laterality (i.e., relatively greater increase of left than right hemisphere performance) or just a general increase of performance
(activation of left and right hemispheres?) and, therefore, whether
findings can be interpreted in terms of laterality models at all (that,
by definition, are about relative differences between the left and
the right hemisphere). In addition, general factors like motivation
or distraction that would have affected all performance may have
confounded previous findings.
Consequently, in the present study special attention was focused
on changes of relative verbal versus figural fluency performance.
Performances on both left and right hemisphere tasks were related
to each other by calculating laterality coefficients, a traditional
technique of laterality research in which the variation in asymmetry is separated from the variation in general magnitude (Harshman
& Lundy, 1988; Papousek & Schulter, 2006; Porac & Coren, 1981;
see Method section). Nonselective effects of altered mood on
cognitive processes, for instance, on general performance or the
willingness to achieve good results are a completely different
matter and will not be considered here.
In the literature, mood has been induced through a wide range of
procedures. Most of these contain high degrees of cognitive de-
mand, for instance, autobiographical recall, imagery, discrimination, naming, understanding the story of a film, and so forth. Again
viewed from the perspective of laterality research, this may be
problematic, because the (not necessarily emotion-related) cognitive processes may also influence activation asymmetry and, consequently, may confound the correlates of emotional experience
(Ehrlichman, 1987). Other mood induction techniques that rely
more on automatic processes like music or odors can be perceived
as pleasant or unpleasant but have limited potential to elicit more
differentiated moods. Therefore, we produced short films that were
designed to automatically “infect” participants with a certain affect. These “emotionally contagious films” (ECOFs) do not contain a story but only show head and shoulders of a woman who
openly expresses the respective affect. One film shows the expression of sadness, anxiety, anger, cheerfulness, and neutral mood,
respectively (see Method section). The use of emotional contagion
for mood induction has the advantage that it represents a largely
automatic and unconscious process (Botvinick et al., 2005; Dimberg, Thunberg, & Elmehed, 2000; Hatfield, Cacioppo, & Rapson,
1994; Hennenlotter et al., 2005; Hess & Blairy, 2001; Neumann &
Strack, 2000; Wicker et al., 2003). Therefore, success of the
manipulation probably depends on cognitive resources less than
other methods. In addition to that, differentiated moods can be
induced, and the induced mood presumably is more substantial and
of longer duration than that elicited, for instance, by pictures with
emotionally relevant content (Biele & Grabowska, 2006; Weyers,
Mühlberger, Hefele, & Pauli, 2006).
Based on these considerations, the aim of the present study was
to test whether cognitive processes associated with left and right
prefrontal cortex vary as a function of valence, motivational
direction, or intensity of induced mood. Effects of watching the
ECOFs on relative changes of verbal versus figural fluency
performance were examined. Specific comparisons were made
between films with positive versus negative valence, approach
versus withdrawal motivation, and low versus high emotional
arousal. Level of interest was evaluated as a control. As mentioned before, it is impossible to completely vary the three
affective dimensions in a fully crossed design. The present
study went beyond other studies in that not only were positive
and negative mood states induced but also a neutral (i.e., low
arousal) condition was used. In addition, negative moods were
not just coupled with the tendency to withdraw (sadness, anxiety) but also with approach motivation (anger), and all conditions were realized in the same study and in a completely
within-subjects design.
Provided that laterality models of affect do not only hold for
interindividual differences (traits) but also for intraindividual
(state-related) changes, the following predictions can be formulated. Participants will show relatively better figural (right hemisphere) than verbal (left hemisphere) fluency performance after (a)
watching films that induce negative valenced as compared to
positive valenced mood (valence model), (b) and/or watching films
that induce withdrawal motivation as compared to approach motivation (motivational direction model), (c) and/or watching films
that induce high emotional arousal (intensity of affect) as compared with films inducing little emotional arousal (right hemisphere model).
EMOTIONALLY CONTAGIOUS FILMS
513
Participants were 70 female, right-handed psychology undergraduates aged 19 to 42 years (M ! 26, SD ! 4 years). The sample
was restricted to women because there is some evidence that the
valence-specific laterality pattern may hold only or more strongly
for women (Kline, Allen, & Schwartz, 1998; Rodway, Wright, &
Hardie, 2003). Moreover, women tend to show stronger responses
to emotional stimuli in general and are more susceptible to experiencing other’s emotions in particular (Kring & Gordon, 1998;
Sonnby-Borgström, Jönsson, & Svensson, 2008). Most importantly, a recent brain imaging study of lateralized responses to
facial expressions indicated that an interaction between sex of the
viewer and sex of the displayed face may exist (Armony &
Sergerie, 2007). Therefore, if women and men had been included in
the sample, it would have been necessary to use a crossed design with
sex of viewer and sex of actor or actress as factors. This would have
been unfeasible in a within subjects design with five different emotions. Handedness was assessed by a standardized handedness test
(performance test; Papousek & Schulter, 1999; Steingrüber & Lienert,
1971). No subject was using drugs or medication.
tained by combining the “escape” and “take action” ratings, with
low values indicating a tendency toward approach and high values
a tendency toward withdrawal [((escape " (100-active))/2]. The
“excitement” and “interesting” ratings were used as indicators for
the evoked amount of emotional arousal and interest.
Participants indicated their judgments on 10 cm horizontal visual analogue scales. Their responses were scored in millimeters
from 0 (“do not agree at all”) to 100 (“strongly agree”). Advantages of analogue scales are that they are time effective, easy to
use, and, when applied repeatedly, may be more sensitive to detect
small differences and may be less influenced by memory than
Likert scales. The special item format was chosen because in
pretests participants had indicated that they found it much easier to
truthfully answer the question “Please indicate what effect the film
had on you personally: The film infected me with sadness” than
questions like “How did you feel while watching the film: I felt
sad.” Findings of other studies provided evidence for the validity
of the ratings. For instance, groups showing higher cardiovascular
responses to a particular film also showed higher scores on the
respective affect rating (Papousek, Freudenthaler, & Schulter,
2008). In another study, findings for the ratings matched results
that were obtained with other methods (Papousek et al., 2009).
ECOFs
Cognitive Tests
Five ECOFs were presented: sadness (S), anxiety (X), anger
(A), cheerfulness (C), and neutral (N). The films (1 min, 20 s each)
all show head and shoulders of the same woman standing in front
of a black background. In the sadness film, the actress is weeping
intensely. In the anxiety film, her facial expression, posture, and
movements are expressing intense fear. In the anger film, she is
openly expressing anger in a rather aggressive way. In the cheerfulness film, she is laughing heartily. In the neutral film, her facial
expression and posture expresses concentration on a task (task not
visible). To make them as comparable as possible, all films were
presented without sound, because only sadness (weeping) and
cheerfulness (laughter) would have been associated with distinct
sounds. The displayed affect was never named before or after
presentation of a film.
For the verbal fluency tasks, participants were instructed to
write on a sheet of paper as many nouns as possible beginning with
a certain letter of the alphabet (“B,” “A,” “F,” “N,” “D”). They
were given 1 min to complete each task and were instructed that
personal names would not be counted and composite words beginning with the same word (e.g., housewife, household) would be
counted only once. In the figural fluency tasks, the participants
were given three figural elements (e.g., a circle and two lines).
They were instructed to draw as many new configurations of the
given elements as possible within a 1-min period and were told
neither to rotate the given elements nor to add any new elements.
The test score was the number of unique designs. The total mean
was M ! 11.0 (SD ! 2.2) for the verbal fluency tasks and M !
13.1 (SD ! 3.2) for the figural fluency tasks. To examine changes
of relative left to right hemisphere performance, performances on
the verbal and figural tasks were related to each other by calculating laterality coefficients [LQ ! ((verbal - figural)/(verbal "
figural))!100]. As the two tests differed in their means and standard deviations, test scores were standardized on the individual
mean across films (T-values) before the calculation of laterality
coefficients, to facilitate interpretation of laterality scores and their
relative changes within participants. Statistical conclusions are not
affected by the standardization.
Method
Participants
Rating Scales
The general instruction for the rating scales read: “Please indicate what effect the film had on you personally.”
Affect ratings. Four ratings were used to evaluate whether the
films specifically evoked the intended affective states: “The film
infected me with cheerfulness,” “The film infected me with anxiety,” “The film infected me with sadness,” “The film infected me
with anger.” Six additional affect ratings were used for control
purposes (disgust, hatred, desire, envy, pride, and joy).
Dimension ratings. The following ratings were used to assess
the affective dimensions: “The film aroused an unpleasant feeling
in me,” “The film aroused a pleasant feeling in me,” “The film
aroused the want to escape in me,” “The film aroused the want to
take action in me,” “The film infected me with excitement,” “The
film aroused my interest.” The “pleasant” and “unpleasant” ratings
were combined to a valence score, with low values indicating
positive and high values indicating negative valence [((unpleasant " (100-pleasant))/2]. A motivational direction score was ob-
Procedure
Participants were tested one by one in an examination room,
where the films were presented on a laptop screen. To facilitate
attention and absorption, the laptop and the head of the participant
were positioned in a black box, to avoid visual distractions. To
avoid acoustic interference, participants wore standard hearing
protection earmuffs. Order of films was counterbalanced, so that
each film was presented at each position with the same overall
frequency. At the beginning, some personality questionnaires were
514
PAPOUSEK, SCHULTER, AND LANG
administered that are not relevant to this report. After the participants had completed practice trials for the verbal and the figural
fluency tasks, the ECOFs were presented. Participants were instructed as follows. “You will now see a short film. Please direct
your whole attention to the film, let the film sink in and try to feel
with the person in the film.” After each film, the participants filled
out the rating scales and completed the verbal and figural fluency
tasks. Half of the participants started with the verbal, and half with
the figural task. Before the next ECOF was presented, a subtest of the
handedness test was administered (left and right hand, 15 s each), to
minimize carryover effects (Rottenberg, Ray, & Gross, 2004).
Prestudy
There were 78 undergraduate students (62 women, 16 men)
aged 18 to 29 years (M ! 21, SD ! 2 years) who participated in
a prestudy that was conducted before the actual study, to verify if
the newly developed films were suitable to evoke the expected
affective states. The prestudy, in which participants only filled out
the rating scales after watching the ECOFs, was carried out as a
group test in a large lecture room. As the analysis of the rating
scales yielded virtually identical results as that of the main study,
details of the results of the prestudy are not reported here. The
results clearly indicated that all films effectively elicit the respective affective states.
Statistical Analysis
To examine the research questions, ANOVAs, analyses of covariance (ANCOVAs), and planned comparisons were performed.
The multivariate approach to repeated measures analyses was used
in case of violation of the sphericity assumption, which allows
valid tests under nonsphericity conditions (Vasey & Thayer,
1987). Covariates in the ANCOVAs were standardized on the
individual mean across conditions, thus eliminating between subjects variability, to effectively control the variance within participants (i.e., individual changes of interest, arousal, or motivational
direction across conditions). For ANOVAs, estimates of effect size
are reported using partial eta-squared (#2p), which gives the proportion of variance a factor or interaction explains of the overall
(effect " error) variance. For t tests, effect sizes were calculated as
Cohen’s d.
Results
Manipulation Check
To confirm effectiveness of the mood induction, a 5 $ 10
ANOVA was conducted, with ECOF (N, C, X, S, A; withinsubjects factor) and affect (cheerfulness, anxiety, sadness, anger,
disgust, hatred, desire, envy, pride, joy; within-subjects factor) as
independent variables and the affect ratings as the dependent
variable. Both main effects (ECOF: F(4, 66) ! 53.13, p % .001,
#2p ! .76; affect: F(9, 61) ! 51.1, p % .001, #2p ! .88) and the
interaction (F(36, 34) ! 13.33, p % .001, #2p ! .93) proved to be
significant. Only the interaction effect is relevant in the context of
this study, however. Means are shown in Table 1. They indicate
that all films successfully evoked the respective affective state. For
each of the films (e.g., anxiety film) the respective affect (e.g.,
anxiety) was rated markedly higher than the other affects (e.g.,
Table 1
Mean Scores of Affect Ratings
Variable
ECOF-N
ECOF-C
ECOF-X
ECOF-S
ECOF-A
Cheerfulness
Anxiety
Sadness
Anger
Disgust
Hatred
Desire
Envy
Pride
Joy
14.3
7.5
13.9
9.1
6.8
6.2
14.7
7.2
13.7
19.7
80.4
5.1
5.2
4.6
4.9
4.6
43.7
6.2
15.7
75.9
6.1
60.6
25.5
16.4
19.6
16.0
7.2
6.3
6.7
6.0
6.2
22.1
72.3
19.1
8.0
15.9
8.6
6.6
7.6
5.5
9.5
31.4
18.6
48.3
20.5
44.9
8.9
16.6
13.1
6.6
Note. ECOF-N, ECOF-C, ECOF-X, ECOF-S, ECOF-A: neutral, cheerfulness, anxiety, sadness, and anger films, respectively. Critical difference
Tukey’s HSD: HSD ! 8.8. Data in italic represent scores of corresponding
pairs of affect ratings and films.
sadness, anger, cheerfulness), and each affect rating (e.g., sadness)
was markedly higher for the respective film (e.g., the sadness film)
than for the other films (e.g., anxiety, anger, cheerfulness, and neutral
film). Moreover, with the exception of very closely related emotions
(anger–hatred and cheerfulness–joy), the evoked affect was not seriously confounded with other emotions. For the neutral film, none of
the affects was rated distinctly higher than the other affects.
To examine to which degree the ECOFs induced changes in the
theoretically relevant dimensions, a one-way multivariate ANOVA
was performed with the dimension ratings (valence, motivational
direction, arousal, interest) as dependent variables and ECOF (N,
C, X, S, A; within-subjects factor) as the independent variable
(F(16, 835) ! 51.18, p % .001, #2p ! .41). Subsequently conducted
univariate F tests showed significant effects for all dimensions:
Valence F(4, 276) ! 119.3 ( p % .001, #2p ! .63); motivational
direction F(4, 276) ! 105.6 ( p % .001, #2p ! .61); arousal F(4,
276 ! 34.2 ( p % .001, #2p ! .33); interest F(4, 276) ! 13.7 ( p %
.001, #2p ! .17). Means and critical differences of post hoc tests are
shown in Table 2. Markedly more negative valence was ascribed
to the affective states after the anxiety, sadness, and anger films
than after the neutral film. The affective state after the cheerfulness
film was rated more pleasant than after the neutral film. The
anxiety and sadness films were associated with markedly more
withdrawal motivation than the neutral, cheerfulness, and anger
films, whereas the anger film did not differ from the neutral and
cheerfulness films. Moreover, the cheerfulness film elicited more
approach motivation than the neutral film. The neutral film evoked
lower scores in the arousal dimension than all other films. Additionally, the sadness film induced slightly less emotional arousal
than the anxiety, anger, and cheerfulness films. The cheerfulness
and the anxiety film were rated more interesting than the other
films, although the effect is clearly smaller than that for the other
dimensions. The interest ratings of the sadness and anger films did
not differ from those of the neutral film.
Lateralized Cognitive Performance
To compare relative verbal versus figural fluency performance after
ECOFs with low versus high degrees of the dimensions of valence,
motivational direction, and arousal, planned comparisons were per-
515
EMOTIONALLY CONTAGIOUS FILMS
Table 2
Mean Scores of Dimension Ratings
Variable
Valence
Motivational direction
Arousal
Interest
ECOF-N ECOF-C ECOF-X ECOF-S ECOF-A
34.2
39.3
12.6
27.4
22.6
26.3
43.9
48.7
69.8
67.8
44.6
41.4
68.7
69.6
32.7
35.5
65.0
33.6
42.9
35.4
Note. ECOF-N, ECOF-C, ECOF-X, ECOF-S, ECOF-A: neutral, cheerfulness, anxiety, sadness, and anger emotionally contagious films, respectively. Critical differences Tukey’s HSD: valence HSD ! 7.8; motivational
direction HSD ! 7.5; arousal HSD ! 9.0; interest HSD ! 8.2.
Table 3
Effects of Emotionally Contagious Films on Relative Verbal
Versus Figural Fluency Performance (Fluency LQ):
Planned Comparisons
Valence
(C vs. XSA)
Motivational direction
(CA vs. XS)
Arousal
(N vs. CXSA)
Positive
1.4
Approach
0.6
Low
3.7
Negative
&1.7
t(69) ! 1.60; ns
Withdrawal
&2.5
t(69) ! 2.06; p % .05
High
&0.9
t(69) ! 2.76; p % .01
Note. N, C, X, S, A: neutral, cheerfulness, anxiety, sadness, and anger
films, respectively; see text for further explanation. Positive values of
fluency LQ indicate relatively better verbal (left hemisphere), negative
values relatively better figural (right hemisphere) performance.
Figure 1. Absolute verbal and figural fluency scores after each film. N !
neutral, C ! cheerfulness, X ! anxiety, S ! sadness, A ! anger, ECOF !
emotionally contagious film.
To further explore the significant effects of motivational direction and arousal two additional analyses tested the effect of one
variable controlling the other. That is, the motivational direction
contrast was tested using arousal as a covariate and the arousal
contrast was tested with motivational direction as the covariate.
Both effects remained significant (motivational direction: t(69) !
2.10, p % .05, d ! .25; arousal: t(69) ! 3.05, p % .005, d ! .37).
These findings suggest that the two emotional dimensions may
make unique contributions in accounting for variance of relative
verbal versus figural fluency performance and, therefore, the effects of motivational direction and emotional arousal may be
additive. In Figure 2 the strong linear relationship of the laterality
scores to the sum of the motivational direction plus arousal ratings
of the films is illustrated in a scatter plot (r ! &.98, n ! 5).
The main analysis was repeated testing other contrasts, in which
not all of the emotional films were used, to provide an alternative
approach to minimize confounds between dimensions (instead of
L
6
4
Mean Fluency LQ
formed. To control possible influences of differences in interest levels,
interest was entered as a covariate. The following specific a priori
contrasts were tested. Valence: C versus X, S, A; motivational direction: C, A versus X, S; arousal: N versus C, X, S, A. The results of the
planned comparisons are shown in Table 3. They indicate that both
approach motivation and low intensity of emotional arousal were
associated with relatively better left than right hemisphere performance (i.e., relatively better verbal than figural fluency performance), whereas withdrawal motivation and high intensity of
emotional arousal were associated with relatively better right than
left hemisphere performance (i.e., relatively better figural than
verbal fluency performance) [Cohen’s d ! .25 and d ! .33 for
motivational direction and arousal, respectively]. The F test of the
omnibus ANCOVA with ECOF (N, C, X, S, A) as the independent
variable and interest as the covariate was also significant (F(4,
275) ! 3.41, p ! .01, #2p ! .05). Adjusted means were: N: M !
3.9, C: M ! 1.2, X: M ! &3.4, S: M ! &1.6, A: M ! &0.1
(HSD ! 5.7). The contribution of interest was not significant, F(1,
275) ! .31, ns. As an additional analysis, the same a priori
contrasts were conducted with absolute verbal or figural fluency
scores (instead of the LQ). In this analysis, stronger approach
motivation, t(69) ! 2.72, p % .01; M ! 11.3 versus M ! 10.5; d !
.33, but not valence, t(69) ! 1.14, ns or arousal, t(69) ! 1.78, ns
was associated with better absolute verbal fluency performance.
Higher intensity of emotional arousal, t(69) ! 2.08, p % .05; M !
13.3 versus M ! 12.5; d ! .25, but not valence, t(69) ! .05, ns or
motivational direction, t(69) ! 0.69, ns was associated with better
absolute figural fluency performance. Mean verbal and figural
fluency scores for individual films are shown in Figure 1.
neutral
2
cheerfulness
0
anger
sadness
-2
anxiety
-4
R -6
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
130
Moviational Direction + Arousal
Figure 2. Scatter plot based on films: Additive model of effects of
motivational direction and emotional arousal on cognitive lateralization.
516
PAPOUSEK, SCHULTER, AND LANG
calculating analyses of covariance). In this analysis, the following
contrasts were tested: Valence: C versus A, t(69) ! 0.56, ns;
motivational direction: A versus X, S, t(69) ! 1.69, p % .10; d !
.20; arousal: N versus C, (X " S)/2, t(69) ! 2.42, p % .05; d !
.30. Interest ratings were used as a covariate. The pattern of results
remained essentially the same as in the original analysis. The
motivational direction effect was weaker, probably because anger
was associated with less approach motivation than cheerfulness
(see Table 2), and in the original contrast both anger and cheerfulness were included.
For the sake of completeness the effect of mood induction on
total performance was examined. The analysis of variance with
ECOF (N, C, X, S, A) as independent and the sum of absolute
verbal and figural fluency scores as the dependent variable yielded
a nonsignificant result, F(4, 276) ! 1.5, ns. A further supplementary analysis with time of performance (1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th test)
as independent and the sum of absolute verbal and figural fluency
scores as the dependent variable, F(4, 276) ! 41.6, p % .001
indicated that on average participants showed somewhat weaker
performances in the later tests (4th test: 21.5, 5th test: 22.2) than
at the beginning of the experiment (1st test: 25.7, 2nd test: 24.4,
3rd test: 26.7). Performances in both tests showed very similar
temporal patterns. None of the other analyses were affected by this
effect, however, because order of films was counterbalanced (see
Method section). General increases or decreases in performance
are also eliminated by use of the laterality quotient. Correlational
analyses examining between subjects variance of changes in cognitive lateralization and the dimension ratings within one emotion
condition produced no significant results.
Discussion
The results of the current study showed that relative left versus
right hemisphere cognitive performance changed after watching
short emotionally contagious films. There is good reason to assume that the different patterns of performance are in fact directly
attributable to emotional factors that were varied. The changes
occurred in the context of experimentally manipulated affective
states, after watching films that (except from the displayed affect)
were completely comparable. The findings supported the validity
of the films as a suitable technique to elicit specific affective states
(i.e., cheerfulness, anxiety, sadness, and anger) and to induce
changes in the dimensions valence, motivational direction, and
arousal in varying degrees. Moreover, the effects clearly cannot be
attributed to differences in interest in the films.
The pattern of results is compatible with predictions that can be
made based on the models that were reviewed in the introduction.
However, the findings suggest that changes of hemisphere specific
cognitive performance were not determined by only one of the
emotional dimensions alone. Independently of each other, both the
tendency to withdraw and emotional arousal seemed to produce
relative advantages for cognitive processes that are more strongly
represented in the right prefrontal cortex. Valence was not identified as a relevant dimension. This corresponds to the supposition
of other researchers that motivational direction may be more
important in this context than valence (Harmon-Jones, 2004a, b;
Harmon-Jones & Allen, 1998; Harmon-Jones & Sigelman, 2001;
Hewig, Hagemann, Seifert, Naumann, & Bartussek, 2004). Results
support the tentative conclusion that changes in hemisphere-
specific cognitive performance are best explained by an additive
combination of motivational direction and arousal. During sadness
and anxiety, when both the tendency to withdraw and emotional
arousal are strong, cognitive asymmetry is most lateralized to the
right hemisphere. During cheerfulness and anger, a relatively
strong arousal component is added to the approach-related affect.
Thus, during these affective states cognitive asymmetry is more
left-lateralized than during sadness and anxiety but more rightlateralized than it is in the neutral condition. The neutral condition
does not elicit distinct approach- or withdrawal-related moods, but
emotional arousal is low. Consequently, the neutral condition is
associated with the leftmost asymmetry, that is, it is not in between
those of the approach- and the withdrawal-related affective states
(see Figure 2).
Present findings replicate and extend those of previous studies
on performance changes in hemisphere-specific cognitive tasks, in
which the study designs were less differentiated with respect to the
affective dimensions (Bartolic et al., 1999; Gray, 2001; see introduction). Other experimental results might in part seem to contradict the present results. It was observed, for instance, that visuospatial working memory (i.e., performance in a task that is more
efficienctly performed by the prefrontal cortex of the right hemisphere) was impaired during acute threat of shock (i.e., during an
unpleasant affective state with withdrawal motivation; Shackman
et al., 2006). This conflict may be resolved by considering the fact
that threat of shock represents an acute stress condition compared
to a manipulation of mood. Several experimental studies have
demonstrated that stress can alter or even reverse hemispheric
specialization of functions (see Papousek & Schulter, 2006 for
review). One possible explanation for these dynamic alterations of
laterality is that efficiency of a hemisphere is best when overall
arousal is intermediate. Normally, additional arousal can prime a
hemisphere, thus increasing its efficiency. However, too much
additional arousal may overload the processing capacities of a
hemisphere and, consequently, reduce its efficiency (Papousek &
Schulter, 2006; and see Gruzelier, 1993 for a similar hypothesis).
A similar suggestion was made by Shackman et al. (2006), without
referring to laterality, however. They proposed that the effects of
threat on working memory performance might obey an inverted-U
function: performance may be disrupted by more extreme levels of
threat but may be enhanced by modest levels of anxiety. Similar
mechanisms may be responsible for observations that in some
studies higher levels of affect facilitated cognitive functions,
whereas in other studies general performance was impaired
(Mitchell & Phillips, 2007). However, it should be noted that the
seemingly contradictory findings are from studies that were not
designed to specifically draw conclusions on hemisphere asymmetries. Thus, in those studies the results may also have been confounded with general effects on performance, for instance, distraction of attention, motivation, and so forth, and are not directly
comparable with those of the present study. It also seems plausible
that distraction processes play a greater role with acute threat of
shock than with moderate changes of mood.
Although laterality models of affect inform the theoretical background of the current study, the findings do not allow direct
interpretations with respect to the models themselves (i.e., more
general interpretations that go beyond the changes of lateralized
cognitive performance). For that, the results will have to be replicated with more direct methods (e.g., EEG) that also permit
517
EMOTIONALLY CONTAGIOUS FILMS
evaluation of whether and how much the effects are localized to
the prefrontal cortex. Nevertheless, current results at least in part
correspond to findings from other studies with electrophysiological or brain imaging methods. Based on an fMRI study, for
instance, Killgore and Yurgelun-Todd (2007) reached a similar
conclusion, that is, the assumption of two lateralized processes,
one associated with emotional processing in general and the other
associated with valence. However, they did not focus on emotional
experience but on emotional perception and, hence, more on
posterior brain regions. The laterality model of Heller and coworkers also implicates the contribution of both the valence and the
arousal dimension. However, in this model only valence is considered as being associated with prefrontal asymmetry, whereas
emotional arousal is thought to be related to more posterior asymmetries (Heller et al., 2003). In neither of these studies was a
differentiation between valence and motivational direction taken
into account. Hence, what was interpreted as the effect of valence
could as well have been an effect of the motivational direction
dimension. However, although figural fluency has not been related
to the parietal cortex yet, the visuospatial component in this task
may also implicate a contribution of posterior brain regions. As the
arousal effect seems to be predominantly attributable to changes in
figural fluency, it cannot be excluded that changes in (right)
posterior brain regions might be responsible for the effect of
emotional arousal on lateralized cognitive performance. Recent
investigations on autonomic nervous system correlates of different
emotion conditions also pointed to the importance of two independent dimensions. When a differentiation of valence and motivational direction was possible, a motivational direction plus arousal
model was considered more appropriate than a valence plus
arousal model (Christie & Friedman, 2004). Nevertheless, in research on the laterality models of affect, the view of combined
effects of more than one affective dimensions does not seem to
have gained much attention yet.
The assumption of an additive effect of intensity of emotional
arousal on prefrontal asymmetry, in addition to the effect of
motivational direction, might explain several contradictory findings in the literature. For instance, different lateralization has been
observed for different types of anxiety that obviously differ in the
extent of emotional arousal. In state anxiety in response to immediate threat (“anxious arousal”) relatively more activity in the right
than left prefrontal cortex was observed, according to the valence
or motivational direction models. However, in anxious apprehension (worry, trait anxiety, anticipation of future threat) this lateralization was considerably weaker (Heller et al., 1997; Nitschke,
Heller, & Miller, 2000; Nitschke, Heller, Palmieri, & Miller,
1999). Of course, other explanations are also suitable for this
finding, for instance, left prefrontal activation because of a strong
contribution of verbal processes in worrying (Nitschke et al.,
1999). Although present results suggest an additive effect of motivational direction and arousal, the possibility that arousal may not be an
independent dimension, but only represents intensity of activation of
either the approach or the withdrawal system (cf. Lang et al., 1998)
cannot be completely excluded either at this stage.
Another reason why further studies will be necessary for more
far-reaching interpretations is that the observed pattern of relations
could in part be specific for the study design of the current
investigation, in which affective states were manipulated by emotional contagion. It was suggested that the right hemisphere may be
more involved in automatic affective processes whereas the left
hemisphere may be more important for their control and modulation (Gainotti, 2000). The affective state that is experienced is a
result of the interplay between automatic processes and their
regulation. As emotional contagion is a largely automatic and
unconscious process (see introduction), regulation processes may
have played a lesser role and automatic processes may have been
relatively more important in the present study than in other studies
in which mood induction procedures requiring more cognitive
activity were used.
In addition, laterality models of affect primarily focus on interindividual differences in affective and laterality traits. Yet, the aim
of the present study was to study changes within individuals
(between emotion conditions), that is, cognitive concomitants of
changes in laterality produced by the manipulation of emotional
factors. Intraindividual changes of a variable that occur across
several observations do not necessarily correspond to the interindividual differences (between-subjects correlations) in the same
variable (Labouvie, 1980; Lykken, 1975; Papousek & Schulter,
2006). Correlational analyses showed that this is not the case in the
present study either. However, the methodology of the present
study is a priori not well suited to study also interindividual
differences. Performances in hemisphere specific cognitive tasks,
although well suited to study changes within individuals (see
introduction), are not suitable to examine differences between
individuals: Both task performance and cortical activation asymmetries are influenced by many independent trait factors (e.g.,
intelligence and trait individual differences in brain lateralization).
Therefore, individual differences in task performance are not suitable as an indicator for individual differences in cortical laterality.
(However, as extensively explained in the introduction, it can be
expected that a relative shift of activation asymmetry to the left is
associated with a relative increase in verbal vs. figural fluency
performance.) The analysis of differences between individuals
would require much stronger assumptions, which cannot be made
based on knowledge of hemispheric laterality.
In conclusion, the present study clearly demonstrated that cognitive performances associated with the dorsolateral prefrontal
cortex and asymmetrically represented in the hemispheres changed
in an explicable way when affective states were manipulated. This
finding suggests that altered mood states are accompanied by
cognitive changes that do not only concern the general functional
capacity of a person, but are specifically related to certain functions that are anatomically or functionally related to the substrates
of affective processes. In addition, the findings suggest important
affective dimensions (or combination of dimensions) to explain
differences in prefrontal activation asymmetries and, thus, may
provide a helpful starting point for future studies.
References
Armony, J. L., & Sergerie, K. (2007). Own-sex effects in emotional
memory for faces. Neuroscience Letters, 426, 1–5.
Baldo, J. V., Shimamura, A. P., Delis, D. C., Kramer, J., & Kaplan, E.
(2001). Verbal and design fluency in patients with frontal lobe lesions.
Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 5, 586 –596.
Bartolic, E. I., Basso, M. R., Schefft, B. K., Glauser, T., & Titanic-Schefft,
M. (1999). Effect of experimentally-induced emotional states on frontal
lobe cognitive task performance. Neuropsychologia, 37, 677– 683.
Biele, C., & Grabowska, A. (2006). Sex differences in perception of
518
PAPOUSEK, SCHULTER, AND LANG
emotion intensity in dynamic and static facial expressions. Experimental
Brain Research, 171, 1– 6.
Blackhart, G. C., & Kline, J. P. (2005). Individual differences in anterior
EEG asymmetry between high and low defensive individuals during a
rumination/distraction task. Personality and Individual Differences, 39,
427– 437.
Borod, J. C. (1992). Interhemispheric and intrahemispheric control of
emotion: A focus on unilateral brain damage. Journal of Consulting and
Clinical Psychology, 60, 339 –348.
Botvinick, M., Jha, A. P., Bylsma, L. M., Fabian, S. A., Solomon, P. E., &
Prkachin, K. M. (2005). Viewing facial expressions of pain engages
cortical areas involved in the direct experience of pain. Neuroimage, 25,
312–319.
Christie, I. C., & Friedman, B. H. (2004). Autonomic specificity of discrete
emotion and dimensions of affective space: A multivariate approach.
International Journal of Psychophysiology, 51, 143–153.
Clark, L., Iversen, S. D., & Goodwin, G. M. (2001). The influence of
positive and negative mood states on risk taking, verbal fluency, and
salivary cortisol. Journal of Affective Disorders, 63, 179 –187.
Davidson, R. J. (1988). EEG measures of cerebral asymmetry: Conceptual
and methodolocial issues. International Journal of Neuroscience, 39,
71– 89.
Davidson, R. J. (1992). Emotion and affective style: Hemispheric substrates. Psychological Science, 3, 39 – 43.
Davidson, R. J. (2000). Cognitive neuroscience needs affective neuroscience (and vice versa). Brain and Cognition, 42, 89 –92.
Davidson, R. J., Chapman, J. P., Chapman, L. J., & Henriques, J. B. (1990).
Asymmetrical brain electrical activity discriminates between
psychometrically-matched verbal and spatial cognitive tasks. Psychophysiology, 27, 528 –543.
Dimberg, U., Thunberg, M., & Elmehed, K. (2000). Unconscious facial
reactions to emotional facial expressions. Psychological Science, 11,
86 – 89.
Drake, R. A. (2004). Selective potentiation of proximal processes: Neurobiological mechanisms for spread of activation. Medical Science Monitor, 10, RA231–RA234.
Drevets, W. C., & Raichle, M. E. (1998). Suppression of regional cerebral
blood during emotional versus higher cognitive implications for interactions between emotion and cognition. Cognition and Emotion, 12,
353–385.
Ehrlichman, H. (1987). Hemispheric asymmetry and positive-negative
affect. In D. Ottoson (Ed.), Duality and unity of the brain (pp. 194 –206).
Houndmills: Macmillan Press.
Elfgren, C. I., & Risberg, J. (1998). Lateralized frontal blood flow increases during fluency tasks: Influence of cognitive strategy. Neuropsychologia, 36, 505–512.
Faith, M., & Thayer, J. F. (2001). A dynamical systems interpretation of a
dimensional model of emotion. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 42,
121–133.
Foster, P. S., Williamson, J. B., & Harrison, D. W. (2005). The Ruff figural
fluency test: Heightened right frontal lobe delta activity as a function of
performance. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 20, 427– 434.
Friedman, L., Kenny, J. T., Wise, A. L., Wu, D., Stuve, T. A., Miller,
D. A., et al. (1998). Brain activation during silent word generation
evaluated with functional MRI. Brain and Language, 64, 231–256.
Frith, C. D., Friston, K. J., Liddle, P. F., & Frackowiak, R. S. (1991). A
PET study of word finding. Neuropsychologia, 29, 1137–1148.
Gaillard, W. D., Hertz-Pannier, L., Mott, S. H., Barnett, A. S., LeBihan, D.,
& Theodore, W. H. (2000). Functional anatomy of cognitive development. fMRI of verbal fluency in children and adults. Neurology, 54,
180 –185.
Gainotti, G. (2000). Neuropsychological theories of emotion. In J. C.
Borod (Ed.), The neuropsychology of emotion (pp. 214 –236). Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Gray, J. R. (2001). Emotional modulation of cognitive control: Approachwithdrawal states double-dissociate spatial from verbal two-back task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130, 436–452.
Gray, J. R. (2004). Integration of emotion and cognitive control. Current
Directions in Psychological Science, 13, 46 – 48.
Gray, J. R., Braver, T. S., & Raichle, M. E. (2002). Integration of emotion
and cognition in the lateral prefrontal cortex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, U. S. A, 99, 4115– 4120.
Gruzelier, J. (1993). The laterality of electrodermal responses: A new
perspective on individual differences in personality and psychopathology. In J. C. Roy, W. Boucsein, D. C. Fowles, & J. H. Gruzelier (Eds.),
Progress in electrodermal research. New York: Plenum Press.
Gur, R. C., Alsop, D., Glahn, D., Petty, R., Swanson, C. L., Maldijan, J. A.,
et al. (2000). An fMRI study of sex differences in regional activation to
a verbal and a spatial task. Brain and Language, 74, 157–170.
Gur, R. C., Ragland, J. D., Resnick, S. M., Skolnick, B. E., Jaggi, J.,
Muenz, L., et al. (1994). Lateralized increases in cerebral blood flow
during performance of verbal and spatial tasks: Relationship with performance level. Brain and Cognition, 24, 244 –258.
Gur, R. C., & Reivich, M. (1980). Cognitive task effects on hemispheric
blood flow in humans: Evidence for individual differences in hemispheric activation. Brain and Language, 9, 78 –92.
Hagemann, D., Hewig, J., Naumann, E., Seifert, J., & Bartussek, D. (2005).
Resting brain asymmetry and affective reactivity. Journal of Individual
Differences, 26, 139 –154.
Harmon-Jones, E. (2004a). Contributions from research on anger and
cognitive dissonance to understanding the motivational functions of
asymmetrical frontal brain activity. Biological Psychology, 67, 51–76.
Harmon-Jones, E. (2004b). On the relationship of frontal brain activity and
anger: Examining the role of attitude toward anger. Cognition and
Emotion, 18, 337–361.
Harmon-Jones, E., & Allen, J. J. B. (1998). Anger and frontal brain
activity: EEG asymmetry consistent with approach motivation despite
negative affective valence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1310 –1316.
Harmon-Jones, E., & Sigelman, J. (2001). State anger and prefrontal brain
activity: Evidence that insult-related relative left-prefrontal activation is
associated with experienced anger and aggression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 797– 803.
Harshman, R. A., & Lundy, M. E. (1988). Can dichotic listening measure
degree of lateralization. In K. Hugdahl (Ed.). Handbook of dichotic
listening: Theory, methods, and research (pp. 215–282). Chichester:
Wiley.
Hatfield, E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Rapson, R. L. (1994). Emotional contagion. Cambridge: University Press.
Heller, W. (1993). Neuropsychological mechanisms of individual differences
in emotion, personality, and arousal. Neuropsychology, 7, 476–489.
Heller, W., Koven, N. S., & Miller, G. A. (2003). Regional brain activity
in anxiety and depression, cognition/emotion interaction, and emotion
regulation. In K. Hugdahl & R. J. Davidson (Eds.), The asymmetrical
brain (pp. 533–564). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Heller, W., & Nitschke, J. B. (1998). The puzzle of regional brain activity
in depression and anxiety: The importance of subtypes and comorbidity.
Cognition and Emotion, 12, 421– 447.
Heller, W., Nitschke, J. B., Etienne, M. A., & Miller, G. A. (1997). Patterns
of regional brain activity differentiate types of anxiety. Journal of
Abnormal Psychology, 106, 376 –385.
Hennenlotter, A., Schroeder, U., Erhard, P., Castrop, F., Haslinger, B.,
Stoecker, D., et al. (2005). A common neural basis for receptive and
expressive communication of pleasant facial affect. Neuroimage, 26,
581–591.
Henry, J. D., & Crawford, J. R. (2004). A meta-analytic review of verbal
fluency performance following focal cortical lesions. Neuropsychology,
18, 284 –295.
EMOTIONALLY CONTAGIOUS FILMS
Herrington, J. D., Mohanty, A., Koven, N. S., Fisher, J. E., Stewart, J. L.,
Banich, M. T., et al. (2005). Emotion-moduated performance and activity in left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Emotion, 5, 200 –207.
Hess, U., & Blairy, S. (2001). Facial mimicry and emotional contagion to
dynamic emotional facial expressions and their influence on decoding
accuracy. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 40, 129 –141.
Hewig, J., Hagemann, D., Seifert, J., Naumann, E., & Bartussek, D. (2004).
On the selective relation of frontal cortical asymmetry and anger-out
versus anger-control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87,
926 –939.
Killgore, W. D. S., & Yurgelun-Todd, D. A. (2007). The right-hemisphere
and valence hypotheses: Could they both be right (and sometimes left)?
Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 2, 240 –250.
Kline, J. P., Allen, J. J. B., & Schwartz, G. E. (1998). Is left frontal brain
activation in defensiveness gender specific. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 107, 149 –153.
Kring, A. M., & Gordon, A. H. (1998). Sex differences in emotion:
Expression, experience and physiology. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 74, 686 –703.
Labouvie, E. W. (1980). Measurement of individual differences in intraindividual changes. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 54 –59.
Lang, P. J., Bradley, M. M., & Cuthbert, B. N. (1998). Emotion, motivation, and anxiety: Brain mechanisms and psychophysiology. Biological
Psychiatry, 44, 1248 –1263.
Lee, G. P., Strauss, E., Loring, D. W., McCloskey, L., Haworth, J. M., &
Lehman, R. A. W. (1997). Sensitivity of figural fluency on the five-point
test to focal neurological dysfunction. Clinical Neuropsychology, 11,
59 – 68.
Levin, R. L., Heller, W., Mohanty, A., Herrington, J. D., & Miller, G. A.
(2007). Cognitive deficits in depression and functional specificity of
regional brain activity. Cognitive Therapy Research, 31, 211–233.
Lykken, D. T. (1975). The role of individual differences in psychophysiological research. In P. H. Venables & M. J. Christie (Eds.), Research in
psychophysiology (pp. 3–15). London: Wiley.
Mitchell, R. L. C., & Phillips, L. H. (2007). The psychological, neurochemical and functional neuroanatomical mediators of the effects of
positive and negative mood on executive functions. Neuropsychologia,
45, 617– 629.
Neumann, R., & Strack, F. (2000). “Mood contagion”: The automatic
transfer of mood between persons. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 79, 211–223.
Nitschke, J. B., Heller, W., & Miller, G. A. (2000). Anxiety, stress, and
cortical brain function. In J. C. Borod (Ed.), The neuropsychology of
emotion (pp. 298 –319). New York: Oxford University Press.
Nitschke, J. B., Heller, W., Palmieri, P. A., & Miller, G. A. (1999).
Contrasting patterns of brain activity in anxious apprehension and anxious arousal. Psychophysiology, 36, 628 – 637.
Northoff, G., Heinzel, A., Bermpohl, F., Niese, R., Pfennig, A., PascualLeone, A., et al. (2004). Reciprocal modulation and attenuation in the
prefrontal cortex: An fMRI study on emotional-cognitive interaction.
Human Brain Mapping, 21, 202–212.
Ochsner, K. N., & Phelps, E. (2007). Emerging perspectives on emotioncognition interactions. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11, 317–318.
Papousek, I., Freudenthaler, H. H., & Schulter, G. (2008). The interplay of
perceiving and regulating emotions in becoming infected with positive and
negative moods. Personality and Individual Differences, 45, 463– 467.
Papousek, I., Ruch, W., Freudenthaler, H. H., Kogler, E., Lang, B., &
Schulter, G. (2009). Gelotophobia, emotion-related skills and responses
to the affective states of others. Personality and Individual Differences,
47, 58 – 63.
Papousek, I., & Schulter, G. (1999). Quantitative assessment of five
519
behavioural laterality measures: Distribution of scores and intercorrelations among right-handers. Laterality, 4, 345–362.
Papousek, I., & Schulter, G. (2002). Covariations of EEG asymmetries and
emotional states indicate that activity at frontopolar locations is particularly affected by state factors. Psychophysiology, 39, 350 –360.
Papousek, I., & Schulter, G. (2004). Manipulation of frontal brain asymmetry by cognitive tasks. Brain and Cognition, 54, 43–51.
Papousek, I., & Schulter, G. (2006). Individual differences in functional
asymmetries of the cortical hemispheres. Revival of laterality research in
emotion and psychopathology. Cognition, Brain, Behavior, 10, 269–298.
Phillips, L. H., Bull, R., Adams, E., & Fraser, L. (2002). Positive mood and
executive function: Evidence from Stroop and fluency tasks. Emotion, 2,
21–22.
Porac, C., & Coren, S. (1981). Lateral preferences and human behavior.
New York: Springer.
Pujol, J., Vendrell, P., Deus, J., Kulisevsky, J., Marti-Vilalta, J. L., Garcia,
C., et al. (1996). Frontal lobe activation during word generation studied
by functional MRI. Acta Neurologica Scandinavica, 93, 403– 410.
Rodway, P., Wright, L., & Hardie, S. (2003). The valence-specific laterality effect in free viewing conditions: The influence of sex, handedness,
and response bias. Brain and Cognition, 53, 452– 463.
Rottenberg, J., Ray, R. R., & Gross, J. J. (2004). Emotion elicitation using
films. In J. A. Coan & J. J. B. Allen (Eds.), The handbook of emotion
elicitation and assessment (pp. 9 –28). New York: Oxford University
Press.
Ruff, R. M., Allen, C. C., Farrow, C. E., Niemann, H., & Wylie, T. (1994).
Figural fluency: Differential impairment in patients with left versus right
frontal lobe lesions. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 9, 41–55.
Shackman, A. J., Sarinopoulos, I., Maxwell, J. S., Pizzagalli, D. A., Lavirc,
A., & Davidson, R. J. (2006). Anxiety selectively disrupts visuospatial
working memory. Emotion, 6, 40 – 61.
Sonnby-Borgström, M., Jönsson, P., & Svensson, O. (2008). Gender differences in facial imitation and verbally reported emotional contagion
from spontaneous to emotionally regulated processing levels. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 49, 111–122.
Steingrüber, H., & Lienert, G. (1971). Hand-dominanz-test. Göttingen:
Hogrefe.
Stewart, J. L., Levin-Silton, R., Sass, S. M., Heller, W., & Miller, G. A.
(2008). Anger style, psychopathology, and regional brain activity. Emotion, 8, 701–713.
Vasey, M. W., & Thayer, J. F. (1987). The continuing problem of false
positives in repeated measures ANOVA in psychophysiology: A multivariate solution. Psychophysiology, 24, 479 – 486.
Wager, T. D., Phan, K. L., Liberzon, I., & Taylor, S. F. (2003). Valence,
gender, and lateralization of functional brain anatomy in emotion: A
meta-analysis of findings from neuroimaging. Neuroimage, 19, 513–
531.
Wendt, P. E., & Risberg, J. (1994). Cortical activation during visual spatial
processing: Relation between hemispheric asymmetry of blood flow and
performance. Brain and Cognition, 24, 87–103.
Westerman, R., Spies, K., Stahl, G., & Hesse, F. W. (1996). Relative
effectiveness and validity of mood induction procedures: A metaanalysis. European Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 557–580.
Weyers, P., Mühlberger, A., Hefele, C., & Pauli, P. (2006). Electromyographic responses to static and dynamic avatar emotional facial expressions. Psychophysiology, 43, 450 – 453.
Wicker, B., Keysers, C., Plailly, J., Royet, J. P., Gallese, V., & Rizzolatti,
G. (2003). Both of us disgusted in my insula: The common neural basis
of seeing and feeling disgust. Neuron, 40, 655– 664.
Received March 14, 2008
Accepted March 31, 2009 !