Ranked semantic judgments of the political stimuli in Study 1 plotted against their ranked percentage of right ear judgments in Study 3.

<p>Ranked semantic judgments of the political stimuli in Study 1 plotted against their ranked percentage of right ear judgments in Study 3.</p

Ranked horizontal position of the political stimuli in Study 2 plotted against their ranked percentage of right ear judgments in Study 3.

<p>Ranked horizontal position of the political stimuli in Study 2 plotted against their ranked percentage of right ear judgments in Study 3.</p

The Shifting Evaluation Window Hypothesis.

<p>An earlier go signal prime (GSP_t1) shifts the evaluation window forward (dotted line) compared to a later go signal prime (GSP_t2). Due to this shift, the backward prime is excluded from the evaluation window.</p

Response Time as a function of SOA Variation, Forward SOA and Backward Congruency (Experiment 2).

<p>Response Time as a function of SOA Variation, Forward SOA and Backward Congruency (<a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0054739#s3" target="_blank">Experiment 2</a>).</p

Receivers’ ratings of sweat sampled from senders under different conditions.

<p>Mean (SD) intensity and pleasantness ratings (7-point Likert scales) of sweat presented to receivers sampled from senders during different phases (baseline, fast stress, slow stress).</p><p>Receivers’ ratings of sweat sampled from senders under different conditions.</p

Mean speed and accuracy of receivers to classify (degraded) facial expressions per odor condition.

<p>(A) Mean reaction time (ms) of facial expression classification (disgust, fear, happy, neutral) per odor condition (baseline, fast stress, slow stress), collapsed over noise levels (for clarification purposes). (B) Mean accuracy (proportion) of facial expression classification (disgust, fear, happy, neutral) per odor condition (baseline, fast stress, slow stress), and noise level (20–100%). Error bars reflect 68% within-subjects CI of the interaction between odor and facial expression.</p

Mean facial muscle activity of receivers per odor condition during classification of presented (emotional) facial expressions.

<p>Odor condition: Baseline, fast stress, slow stress. Facial expressions that had to be classified: Neutral, happy, fear, disgust. For clarification purposes, the display of mean facial muscle activity on the emotional facial expression classification task was collapsed over the variable noise level (20%, 40%, 60%, 80%, 100%). (A) Mean <i>corrugator supercilii</i> activity, averaged over 1 second following the onset of the presented expression. (B) Mean <i>medial frontalis</i> activity, averaged over 1 second following the onset of the presented expression. Error bars reflect 68% within-subjects CI of the main effect of odor.</p

Study design Experiment Part 1.

<p>The timeline displays sweat sampling conditions: baseline, fast stress (i.e., SAM activity), slow stress (i.e., HPA axis activity), and measurements: heart rate, cortisol, sweat production. <i>T</i> = time. <i>T</i>+20 = 20 minutes passed since the start of the experiment.</p

Response Time as a function of Forward SOA and Backward Congruency (Experiment 1).

<p>Response Time as a function of Forward SOA and Backward Congruency (<a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0054739#s2" target="_blank">Experiment 1</a>).</p

Physiological outcomes senders.

<p>Physiological measurements obtained from senders during three conditions: pleasant-neutral baseline, preparation for a speech (i.e., fast stress, SAM axis activity), and recovery from speech preparation (i.e., slow stress, HPA axis activity). (A) Mean heart rate (bpm) per condition. (B) Mean sweat production (mg) per condition. (C) Mean salivary cortisol (nmol/l) over time, including a measure following lab entry and measurements before and after each experimental condition (Base = Baseline; Fast = Fast stress; Slow = Slow stress). Error bars ± 68% within-subjects confidence interval (CI) of the main effect (for the formula leading up to the calculation of the CI, see [<a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0118211#pone.0118211.ref066" target="_blank">66</a>]; for the choice of a 68% CI, see [<a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0118211#pone.0118211.ref067" target="_blank">67</a>]).</p