## 3 Results
### Self-Report Data  
The participants' subjective assessment of task difficulty was measured using the NASA-TLX), as can be seen in Figure 12. Consistently lower felt mental demand was observed in neutral relative to negative conditions rather than in low-load relative to high-load conditions (Emotion: \(F[1,\,35]\) = 5.69, \(p=0.023\); Workload: \(F[1,\,35]\) = 0.88, \(p=0.355\); Interaction: \(F[1,\,35]\) = 1.89, \(p=0.179\)), where the post hoc \(t\)-test revealed significantly higher levels of mental demand in the negative conditions (\(M\) = 3.33, \(SD\) = 4.23) than in the neutral conditions (\(M=-0.33\), \(SD\) = 5.06), regardless of workload manipulation, \(t(35)=-2.35\), \(p=0.024\), \(\eta^{2}=0.78\). A relatively similar difference concerned participants' felt physical  
Figure 11: Boxplots showing all correlations (on the \(y\)-axis) for each of the nine participants in each group. Each boxplot shows the distribution of \(R^{2}\) scores of a specific participant, with one score per answer during the manipulation phase. Black horizontal bars indicate mean correlations, green areas depict quartiles of the distributions, whiskers depict maximal and minimal correlations, and the gray diamonds depict outliers that have been removed for the calculations. Boxplots are sorted in ascending order of the mean \(R^{2}\) scores from left to right. CogLoad: modeled cognitive load according to the algorithm. demand (Emotion: \(F[1,\,35]\) = 6.28, \(p\) = 0.017; Workload: \(F[1,\,35]\) = 0.25, \(p\) = 0.619; Interaction: \(F[1,\,35]\) = 1.572, \(p\) = 0.219) where the post hoc \(t\)-test revealed significantly higher levels of physical demand in the negative conditions (\(M\) = \(-\)3.39, \(SD\) = 4.46) than in the neutral conditions (\(M\) = \(-\)6.72, \(SD\) = 3.43), regardless of workload manipulation, \(t(35)\) = \(-\)2.51, \(p\) = 0.017, \(\eta^{2}\) = 0.84, and felt frustration (Emotion: \(F[1,\,35]\) = 7.99, \(p\) = 0.008; Workload: \(F[1,\,35]\) = 0.20, \(p\) = 0.658; Interaction: \(F[1,\,35]\) = 0.01, \(p\) = 0.929) during the interview, where the post hoc \(t\)-test revealed significantly higher levels of frustration in the negative conditions (\(M\) = \(-\)2.22, \(SD\) = 5.81) than in the neutral conditions (\(M\) = 3.06, \(SD\) = 5.07), regardless of the workload manipulation, \(t(35)\) = \(-\)2.91, \(p\) = 0.006, \(\eta^{2}\) = 0.97. A Tukey-HSD post hoc evaluation revealed a significant difference between groups of different emotional manipulation in the \"Mental-Demand\" scale (\(p\) = 0.023, 95%, CI = [0.534, 6.799]), in the \"Physical-Demand\" scale (\(p\) = 0.017, 95%, CI = [0.626, 6.041]), and in the \"Frustration\" scale (\(p\) = 0.008, 95%, CI = [1.475, 9.080]). All of these were perceived as stronger in the negative emotion condition compared to the neutral condition. All other differences in all other scales, as well as in all pairwise comparisons, were not significant. The participants' self-assessed performance regarding the verbal and verbal-visual task in the high- and low-workload conditions is backed up by their actual accuracy rates in the verbal task (see Supplementary Figure S2). However, somewhat at odds with an experienced higher demand during the negative than during the neutral conditions, there were no significant performance (accuracy) differences in the verbal-visual task between the neutral and the negative high-workload (see Supplementary Figure S3) groups. There were also no other significant differences between groups. In the memory test at the end of the interview (see Supplementary Figure S1), groups also showed very similar results. Subjectively felt emotions during the interview were assessed using the Self-Assessment Manikin (SAM), measuring the participants' happiness, arousal, and control (Figure 13).