Attentional bias

Last updated

Attentional bias refers to how a person's perception is affected by selective factors in their attention. [1] Attentional biases may explain an individual's failure to consider alternative possibilities when occupied with an existing train of thought. [2] For example, cigarette smokers have been shown to possess an attentional bias for smoking-related cues around them, due to their brain's altered reward sensitivity. [3] Attentional bias has also been associated with clinically relevant symptoms such as anxiety and depression. [4]

Contents

In decision making

A commonly studied experiment to test for attentional bias is one in which there are two variables, a factor (A) and a result (B). Both can be either present (P) or not present (N). This results in four possible combinations:

  1. Both the factor and result are present (AP/BP)
  2. Both the factor and result are not present (AN/BN)
  3. While the factor is present, the result is not (AP/BN)
  4. While the result is present, the factor is not (AN/BP)

The four combinations can be shown in table form as follows:

A present (A)A not present (A')
B present (B)AP/BPAN/BP
B not present (B')AP/BNAN/BN

A common question which follows the structure of the above experiment is: "Does God answer prayers?" [5] Due to attentional bias, theists tend to say "yes". They focus on the present/present (A/B) cell, as their religious beliefs in a deity cause them to fixate on the occasions when they were given what they asked for, thus they use the justification: "Many times I've asked God for something, and he's given it to me." Similarly, due to attentional bias, atheists equally tunnel on data from the present/absent (A/B', A'/B) cells: "Has God ever given me something that I didn't ask for?" or "Have I asked God for something and didn't receive it?" This experiment too supports Smedslund's general conclusion that subjects tend to ignore part of the table depending on their specific attentional biases. [2]

The scenarios can be illustrated below in a similar table to above:

Asked god for A (A)Did not ask god for A (A')
A was fulfilled (B)A/BA'/B
A was not fulfilled (B')A/B'A'/B'

When making decisions, attentional biases toward positive stimuli have been associated with numerous positive outcomes, such as increased social engagement, increased prosocial behaviour, decreased externalizing disorders, and decreased emotionally withdrawn behavior. [6] [7] In contrast, individuals with clinically relevant symptoms, such as anxiety disorder [1] and chronic pain [8] are shown to prioritize threat cues over reward cues. [9] [10] [4] [11] In one experiment, faces with varying valences were presented (neutral, threatening, and happy) with a forced-choice reaction time at two exposure durations, 500 and 1250msec. For individuals with high trait anxiety, there was strong evidence for an attentional bias favoring threatening facial expressions. Additionally, increased dysphoria correlated with the tendency to avoid happy faces. [12] [13] This tendency leads to a spiraling effect, as one will only see negative faces, which induces greater anxiety, which exacerbates the aforementioned tendency to avoid positive stimuli – a form of the vigilance-avoidance pattern. [14]

Notably, there is also a difference in attention biases between anxious and depressed individuals. Word pairs were shown to the subjects, with a dot probe following a word of each pair (dot probe paradigm). One-half of the word pairs were presented on the subliminal level, and the other half were presented on the supraliminal level, and then the response time was measured. As expected, the anxious and depressed groups showed an attentional bias towards negative words compared to the normal control group. On a supraliminal level, the depressed group showed greater vigilance for threat stimuli than the anxious group. However, for subliminal threat stimuli, the anxious group showed a greater vigilance, which implies an anxiety-related bias on the subconscious level. [15]

In addictive behaviour

Research from the past two decades has established that addictive behaviour is strongly correlated to the attentional bias for substance-related cues, in how the latter characterizes the former. [16] An example of this is smoking and smoking-related cues. [3]

Research (using the Stroop paradigm) tested the effect of mixing smoking related words (cigarette, puff, and smoke) with: negative connoting words (sick, pain and guilty), positive connoting words, (safe, glad, and hopeful) and neutral connoting words (tool, shovel, and hammer). Results showed a strong correlation between a slower reaction time and the degree of negative language employed when discussing smoking. The results indicate attentional bias, suggesting the influence negative language has had on the individual attitude towards smoking. [17] When asked to think of the negative consequences of smoking, as the negative language evoked underlying negative feelings toward smoking, they displayed fewer cravings than the smoker subjects who were encouraged to smoke. [18] The experiment illustrates the influence of attentional bias on environmental smoking cues and how these could contribute to a smokers' inability to quit. As stated earlier individuals' attentional biases are influenced by subliminal stimuli, so in the smoker's case, they are more subject to substance-related stimuli such as observing other smokers or noticing ads for cigarettes. [19] The stimuli evoke expectancy of substance availability, which creates a further attentional bias for substance-related stimuli and induces craving for the substance. [16]

Similar Stroop paradigm studies have concluded that attentional bias is not dependent on smoking itself, but rather the person who is the smoker displays attentional bias. A recent study required one group of smokers to refrain from smoking the night before and another less than an hour before. Abstinence from smoking created a slower reaction time, but a smoke break between study sessions showed increased reaction time. Researchers say this shows that nicotine dependence intensifies attention, but does not directly depend on smoking itself due to lack of evidence. [20] The longer reaction time suggests smokers craving a cigarette linger on smoking-related words. [21] Smokers and smokers attempting to quit displayed the same slower reaction time for smoking-related words, [22] which supports research that implies attentional bias is a behavioral mechanism versus a dependency mechanism, due to the fact that the smokers were slowed down by smoking-related words and negative words, but not slowed down by positive and neutral words.

Drug addiction is also an example of attentional bias in that certain memories or objects can prompt intense cravings for one's drug of choice. It is easier for individuals who experience this to relapse and begin their drug use again, because the urges given off by that initial stimuli can prove to be too strong to curb. [23] There are some ways that individuals could overcome attentional bias, and a solution is stimuli-related therapy. This type of therapy would give those struggling with addiction and relapse an opportunity to overcome the initial fear associated with a particular object. A study conducted by a group of researchers in the Netherlands found that by giving participants an opportunity to attend therapy sessions during their treatment for drug addiction, more participants remained drug-free compared to those who relapsed. [24] Therefore, the conclusion can be drawn that with exposure therapy, the number of patients who will leave a treatment facility and relapse decreases. The Stroop Test also showed in this study that between the control group and the treatment group the only major component of the test was time; researchers made the claim that those who received treatment reacted a lot faster to certain drug-related stimuli versus those in the control group who did not. [24] This means that when experiencing attentional bias, treated addicts seemed to brush off the memories a little easier compared to those who had not received proper treatment. In other words, certain steps need to be taken in treatment facilities across the country to ensure that drug addiction no longer rises, or continues to ruin people's lives. Also, a therapy of this kind should be closely monitored and mandatory to ensure the smallest number of relapses occur after treatment.

Measurements

There are two different forms of attentional bias that can be measured:

Within-subject bias
When there is a significant difference between an anxious individuals' attention bias towards threat-related stimuli and attention bias towards neutral stimuli (which usually favors threat-related stimuli) [1]
Between-subject bias
When there is a significant difference between non-anxious and anxious individuals' attention bias towards and neutral stimuli and threat-related stimuli [1]

Measurement paradigms

There are four main paradigms used to measure attentional bias: [4]

Stroop paradigm
The Stroop paradigm was the first measure of attentional bias. [4] It also uses reaction time, only in this case utilizing colors. The subject would have to read the color of the word (e.g. brown), however, the name of the word would be a different color (e.g. red). Variations involve the opposite, where one would have to read the name of the word, but the color of the word would differ.
Dot-probe paradigm
The dot-probe paradigm/task is the gold standard in attentional bias research, considered an upgraded version of the dot-probe paradigm. [4] Two stimuli of difference valences are presented simultaneously for a fixed time. Then, a probe replaces one of the two stimuli, which the participants have to respond to – by classifying the probe or responding to the location. [14]
Posner paradigm
The Posner paradigm or Posner cueing task is similar to the dot-probe paradigm. [4] It is a sight test, which assesses the individual's ability to switch and focus on different stimuli presented. The subject focuses on a specific point, then attempts to react as quickly as possible to target stimuli presented to the sides of the specified point.
Visual search paradigm
The visual search is a less used method of assessing attentional bias. [14] It involves measuring one's ability to spot and discern particular objects among other objects.

While the other options are valid methods, they all tap into different aspects of attention bias. [1] Because of this, some methods are less used when looking into specific aspects of attentional bias. For example, in a posner cueing task, the cues were either a neutral, angry or happy, facial expression. There were both valid (targets appearing in the same location as the cue/face) and invalid trials (The target appearing in a different location to the cue/face). Surprisingly enough, in the invalid tests, individuals' response times increased to the same degree of attentional bias for both negative stimuli and positive stimuli, contrary to hundreds of other studies. [13]

Mechanisms

On a scientific level, attentional bias often seen in eye-tracking movements is thought to be an underlying issue of addiction. Smokers linger on smoking cues compared with neutral cues. Researchers found higher activation in the insular cortex, the orbitofrontal cortex and the amygdala when presented with smoking cues. The orbitofrontal cortex is known to be coordinated with drug-seeking behavior and the insular cortex and amygdala are involved in the autonomic and emotional state of an individual. [25] [26]

Neural activity is also known to decrease upon the beginning of smoking, focusing the smokers' attention on their upcoming cigarette. Therefore, when smoking cues are nearby it is harder for a smoker to concentrate on other tasks. This is seen in the activation of the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex, known for focusing attention on relevant stimuli. [27] [28]

However, beyond this, the mechanisms of attentional bias is an uncertain area, as there are many conflicting theories on how attentional biases operate. [1] An initial theory was schema theory, in which it was believed schema was biased towards threats, thus threat-related material is always favored in cognitive thinking. [29] Conversely, other individuals have argued that humans are prone to attentional biases at certain points of information processing, which is now a more common topic of controversy. [14]

Psychologist J. Mark G. Williams and colleagues have argued that anxious individuals tend to prioritize threat stimuli during early information processing, and direct their attention away from threats in more strategic stages of processing. [30] This correlates with the vigilance-avoidance pattern, which is when one initially directs attention to threat, however then proceeds to avoid processing details and information in order to avoid an anxious state of mind. [14] Conversely, others theorize that anxiety has little impact on initial detection of threats but has is more significant in modulating the maintenance of attention on the source of the threat. [1] This can be explained by the alternative theory to the vigilance-avoidance pattern, which is that anxious individuals, once processing the threat, struggle to disengage attention from the threat stimuli due to reasons such as fear. [14]

Regardless of the opinions, there have been numerous studies which attempt to find the ultimate explanation. However, there have been results which support both theories, thus making the mechanisms of attention bias an uncertain topic.

Variables

Time

In one study, stimulus exposure duration was tested against attentional bias for threat stimuli (for non-clinical anxiety). Individuals were given exposure durations of 100, 500, and 1500 millisecond intervals. However, there seemed to be no significant change in the bias towards threat stimuli. [14] The experiment has yet to be tested for clinical anxiety.

Neurocognitive function

A study also explored the negative relationship between neurocognitive function and attentional bias. Individuals with a lower capacity in the attentional domain, particularly in digit symbol coding, exhibited more attentional bias toward threats. [14]

Clinical applications

The link between attentional biases and addictions illustrate how controlling attentional processes may be essential in assisting smokers who are trying to quit. However, this is not dealt with, as in the case of the United Kingdom (UK), the Stop Smoking Services (SSS) and National Health Service (NHS) both have yet to target attentional biases in their smoking cessation programs. [3]

Individuals with clinically relevant symptoms, such as anxiety disorders [1] and chronic pain [8] are shown to initially focus on threatening information. [9] [10] [4] [11] However, there is still uncertainty regarding the causes of this relationship. Two studies explored the causes by using a modified dot-probe paradigm and experimentally inducing differential attentional responses to emotional stimuli and then noting the effect on the consequential emotional vulnerability. The results confirmed how inducing attentional bias can alter emotional vulnerability, thus introducing the possibility that cognitive-experimental procedures designed around these results have potential therapeutic value in the future. [11]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Smoking cessation</span> Process of discontinuing tobacco smoking

Smoking cessation, usually called quitting smoking or stopping smoking, is the process of discontinuing tobacco smoking. Tobacco smoke contains nicotine, which is addictive and can cause dependence. As a result, nicotine withdrawal often makes the process of quitting difficult.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Stroop effect</span> Effect of psychological interference on reaction time

In psychology, the Stroop effect is the delay in reaction time between congruent and incongruent stimuli.

Motivational salience is a cognitive process and a form of attention that motivates or propels an individual's behavior towards or away from a particular object, perceived event or outcome. Motivational salience regulates the intensity of behaviors that facilitate the attainment of a particular goal, the amount of time and energy that an individual is willing to expend to attain a particular goal, and the amount of risk that an individual is willing to accept while working to attain a particular goal.

In internal medicine, relapse or recidivism is a recurrence of a past condition. For example, multiple sclerosis and malaria often exhibit peaks of activity and sometimes very long periods of dormancy, followed by relapse or recrudescence.

Affective neuroscience is the study of how the brain processes emotions. This field combines neuroscience with the psychological study of personality, emotion, and mood. The basis of emotions and what emotions are remains an issue of debate within the field of affective neuroscience.

In psychology, the emotional Stroop task is used as an information-processing approach to assessing emotions. Like the standard Stroop effect, the emotional Stroop test works by examining the response time of the participant to name colors of words presented to them. Unlike the traditional Stroop effect, the words presented either relate to specific emotional states or disorders, or they are neutral. For example, depressed participants will be slower to say the color of depressing words rather than non-depressing words. Non-clinical subjects have also been shown to name the color of an emotional word slower than naming the color of a neutral word. Negative words selected for the emotional Stroop task can be either preselected by researchers or taken from the lived experiences of participants completing the task. Typically, when asked to identify the color of the words presented to them, participants reaction times for negative emotional words is slower than the identification of the color of neutral words. While it has been shown that those in negative moods tend to take longer to respond when presented with negative word stimuli, this is not always the case when participants are presented with words that are positive or more neutral in tone.

The dot-probe paradigm is a test used by cognitive psychologists to assess selective attention.

Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) is an approach to psychotherapy that uses cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) methods in collaboration with mindfulness meditative practices and similar psychological strategies. The origins to its conception and creation can be traced back to the traditional approaches from East Asian formative and functional medicine, philosophy and spirituality, birthed from the basic underlying tenets from classical Taoist, Buddhist and Traditional Chinese medical texts, doctrine and teachings.

Cue reactivity is a type of learned response which is observed in individuals with an addiction and involves significant physiological and psychological reactions to presentations of drug-related stimuli. The central tenet of cue reactivity is that cues previously predicting receipt of drug reward under certain conditions can evoke stimulus associated responses such as urges to use drugs. In other words, learned cues can signal drug reward, in that cues previously associated with drug use can elicit cue-reactivity such as arousal, anticipation, and changes in behavioral motivation. Responses to a drug cue can be physiological, behavioral, or symbolic expressive. The clinical utility of cue reactivity is based on the conceptualization that drug cues elicit craving which is a critical factor in the maintenance and relapse to drug use. Additionally, cue reactivity allows for the development of testable hypotheses grounded in established theories of human behavior. Therefore, researchers have leveraged the cue reactivity paradigm to study addiction, antecedents of relapse, craving, translate pre-clinical findings to clinical samples, and contribute to the development of new treatment methods. Testing cue reactivity in human samples involves exposing individuals with a substance use disorder to drug-related cues and drug neutral cues, and then measuring their reactions by assessing changes in self-reported drug craving and physiological responses.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Nicotine withdrawal</span> Process of withdrawing from nicotine addiction

Nicotine withdrawal is a group of symptoms that occur in the first few weeks after stopping or decreasing use of nicotine. Symptoms include intense cravings for nicotine, anger or irritability, anxiety, depression, impatience, trouble sleeping, restlessness, hunger or weight gain, and difficulty concentrating. Withdrawal symptoms make it harder to quit nicotine products, and most methods for quitting smoking involve reducing nicotine withdrawal. Quit smoking programs can make it easier to quit. Nicotine withdrawal is recognized in both the American Psychiatric Association Diagnostic and Statistical Manual and the WHO International Classification of Diseases.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Nicotine dependence</span> Chronic disease

Nicotine dependence is a state of dependence upon nicotine. Nicotine dependence is a chronic, relapsing disease defined as a compulsive craving to use the drug, despite social consequences, loss of control over drug intake, and emergence of withdrawal symptoms. Tolerance is another component of drug dependence. Nicotine dependence develops over time as a person continues to use nicotine. The most commonly used tobacco product is cigarettes, but all forms of tobacco use and e-cigarette use can cause dependence. Nicotine dependence is a serious public health problem because it leads to continued tobacco use, which is one of the leading preventable causes of death worldwide, causing more than 8 million deaths per year.

Social anxiety is the anxiety and fear specifically linked to being in social settings. Some categories of disorders associated with social anxiety include anxiety disorders, mood disorders, autism spectrum disorders, eating disorders, and substance use disorders. Individuals with higher levels of social anxiety often avert their gazes, show fewer facial expressions, and show difficulty with initiating and maintaining a conversation. Social anxiety commonly manifests itself in the teenage years and can be persistent throughout life; however, people who experience problems in their daily functioning for an extended period of time can develop social anxiety disorder. Trait social anxiety, the stable tendency to experience this anxiety, can be distinguished from state anxiety, the momentary response to a particular social stimulus. Half of the individuals with any social fears meet the criteria for social anxiety disorder. Age, culture, and gender impact the severity of this disorder. The function of social anxiety is to increase arousal and attention to social interactions, inhibit unwanted social behavior, and motivate preparation for future social situations.

Attentional retraining is the retraining of automatic attentional processes. The method of retraining varies but has typically employed computerized training programs. The term originally indicated retraining of attention to rehabilitate individuals after a brain injury who had neurological disorders of attention including hemineglect, perseveration, limited attention span, and even ADHD. However, in more recent research and clinical applications attentional retraining has also been applied as a type of cognitive bias modification. In this application, attentional retraining refers to the retraining of automatic attentional biases that have been observed in high levels of anxiety.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Cognitive bias modification</span>

Cognitive bias modification (CBM) refers to procedures used in psychology that aim to directly change biases in cognitive processes, such as biased attention toward threat stimuli and biased interpretation of ambiguous stimuli as threatening. The procedures are designed to modify information processing via cognitive tasks that use basic learning principles and repeated practice to encourage a healthier thinking style in line with the training contingency.

Emotion perception refers to the capacities and abilities of recognizing and identifying emotions in others, in addition to biological and physiological processes involved. Emotions are typically viewed as having three components: subjective experience, physical changes, and cognitive appraisal; emotion perception is the ability to make accurate decisions about another's subjective experience by interpreting their physical changes through sensory systems responsible for converting these observed changes into mental representations. The ability to perceive emotion is believed to be both innate and subject to environmental influence and is also a critical component in social interactions. How emotion is experienced and interpreted depends on how it is perceived. Likewise, how emotion is perceived is dependent on past experiences and interpretations. Emotion can be accurately perceived in humans. Emotions can be perceived visually, audibly, through smell and also through bodily sensations and this process is believed to be different from the perception of non-emotional material.

Personality theories of addiction are psychological models that associate personality traits or modes of thinking with an individual's proclivity for developing an addiction. Models of addiction risk that have been proposed in psychology literature include an affect dysregulation model of positive and negative psychological affects, the reinforcement sensitivity theory model of impulsiveness and behavioral inhibition, and an impulsivity model of reward sensitization and impulsiveness.

Pavlovian-instrumental transfer (PIT) is a psychological phenomenon that occurs when a conditioned stimulus that has been associated with rewarding or aversive stimuli via classical conditioning alters motivational salience and operant behavior. Two distinct forms of Pavlovian-instrumental transfer have been identified in humans and other animals – specific PIT and general PIT – with unique neural substrates mediating each type. In relation to rewarding stimuli, specific PIT occurs when a CS is associated with a specific rewarding stimulus through classical conditioning and subsequent exposure to the CS enhances an operant response that is directed toward the same reward with which it was paired. General PIT occurs when a CS is paired with one reward and it enhances an operant response that is directed toward a different rewarding stimulus.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Judson A. Brewer</span> American psychiatrist, neuroscientist and author

Judson Alyn Brewer is an American psychiatrist, neuroscientist and author. He studies the neural mechanisms of mindfulness using standard and real-time fMRI, and has translated research findings into programs to treat addictions. Brewer founded MindSciences, Inc., an app-based digital therapeutic treatment program for anxiety, overeating, and smoking. He is director of research and innovation at Brown University's Mindfulness Center and associate professor in behavioral and social sciences in the Brown School of Public Health, and in psychiatry at Brown's Warren Alpert Medical School.

Future tripping, also referred to as anticipatory anxiety, describes a type of fear that occurs when an anticipated event in the future causes distress. These events can include both major occasions, such as a presentation, but depending on the individual could also happen before some minor event, like going out. It is not seen as a distinct type of anxiety but rather plays a part in many variations and can be found in numerous disorders and is strongly connected to panic attacks, often following them.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mindfulness-Oriented Recovery Enhancement</span> Mind-Body therapy program

Mindfulness-Oriented Recovery Enhancement (MORE) is an evidence-based mind-body therapy program developed by Eric Garland. It is a therapeutic approach grounded in affective neuroscience that combines mindfulness training with reappraisal and savoring skills. Garland developed this approach by combining the key features of mindfulness training, "Third Wave" cognitive-behavioral therapy, and principles from positive psychology.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Bar-Haim, Yair; Lamy, Dominique; Pergamin, Lee; Bakermans-Kranenburg, Marian J.; van IJzendoorn, Marinus H. (2007). "Threat-related attentional bias in anxious and nonanxious individuals: A meta-analytic study". Psychological Bulletin. 133 (1): 1–24. CiteSeerX   10.1.1.324.4312 . doi:10.1037/0033-2909.133.1.1. PMID   17201568. S2CID   2861872.
  2. 1 2 Baron, Jonathan (2008). Thinking and Deciding. Cambridge University Press. p. 187. ISBN   978-1-139-46602-8 . Retrieved 27 August 2013.
  3. 1 2 3 Begh, Rachna; Munafo, Marcus; Shiffman, Saul; Ferguson, Stuart; Nicols, Linda; Mohammed, Mohammed; Holder, Roger; Sutton, Stephen; Aveyard, Paul (December 2013). "Attentional bias retraining in cigarette smokers attempting smoking cessation (ARTS): Study protocol for a double blind randomised controlled trial". BMC Public Health. 13 (1): 1176. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-13-1176 . PMC   3890623 . PMID   24330656.
  4. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Pfabigan, Daniela M.; Tran, Ulrich S. (2015). Behavioral and Physiological Bases of Attentional Biases: Paradigms, Participants, and Stimuli. Frontiers Media SA. pp. 5–10. ISBN   978-2-88919-640-1.
  5. ↑ Nisbett, Richard (1980). Human inference: Strategies and shortcomings of social judgment. Pretice Hall. pp. 92–93. ISBN   978-0134451305 . Retrieved 18 April 2017.
  6. ↑ Troller-Renfree, Sonya; McDermott, Jennifer Martin; Nelson, Charles A.; Zeanah, Charles H.; Fox, Nathan A. (2015). "The effects of early foster care intervention on attention biases in previously institutionalized children in Romania". Developmental Science. 18 (5): 713–722. doi:10.1111/desc.12261. PMC   4447605 . PMID   25439678.
  7. ↑ Troller-Renfree, Sonya; McLaughlin, Katie A.; Sheridan, Margaret A.; Nelson, Charles A.; Zeanah, Charles H.; Fox, Nathan A. (January 2017). "The beneficial effects of a positive attention bias among children with a history of psychosocial deprivation". Biological Psychology. 122: 110–120. doi:10.1016/j.biopsycho.2016.04.008. PMC   5074922 . PMID   27109625.
  8. 1 2 Schoth, Daniel E.; Liossi, Christina (2010). "Attentional Bias Toward Pictorial Representations of Pain in Individuals With Chronic Headache". The Clinical Journal of Pain. 26 (3): 244–250. doi:10.1097/AJP.0b013e3181bed0f9. PMID   20173439. S2CID   205454744.
  9. 1 2 Mogg, Karin; Bradley, Brendan; Dixon, Claire; Fisher, Susan; Twelftree, Helen (June 2000). "Trait anxiety, defensiveness and selective processing of threat: an investigation using two measures of attentional bias". Personality and Individual Differences. 28 (6): 1063, 1064, 1073. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(99)00157-9.
  10. 1 2 Mathews, A.; MacLeod, Colin (February 1994). "Cognitive approaches to emotion and emotional disorders". Annual Review of Psychology. 45 (1): 25–30, 41–50. doi:10.1146/annurev.ps.45.020194.000325. PMID   8135504.
  11. 1 2 3 MacLeod, Colin; Rutherford, Elizabth; Campbell, Lyn; Ebsworthy, Greg; Holker, Lin (February 2002). "Selective attention and emotional vulnerability: Assessing the causal basis of their association through the experimental manipulation of attentional bias". J Abnorm Psychol. 111 (1): 107–123. doi:10.1037/0021-843X.111.1.107. PMID   11866165.
  12. ↑ Bradley, Brendan; Mogg, Karin; Falla, Sara; Hamilton, Lucy (1998). "Attentional Bias for Threatening Facial Expressions in Anxiety: Manipulation of Stimulus Duration". Cognition and Emotion. 12 (6): 737–751. doi:10.1080/026999398379411.
  13. 1 2 Fox, Elaine; Russo, Ricardo; Dutton, Kevin (May 2002). "Attentional bias for threat: Evidence for delayed disengagement from emotional faces". Cognition and Emotion. 16 (3): 355–379. doi:10.1080/02699930143000527. PMC   2241753 . PMID   18273395.
  14. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Mogg, Karin; Bradley, Brendan; Bono, Jo; Painter, Michelle (April 1997). "Time course of attentional bias for threat information in non-clinical anxiety". Behaviour Research and Therapy. 35 (4): 297–303. doi:10.1016/s0005-7967(96)00109-x. PMID   9134784.
  15. ↑ Mogg, Karin; Bradley, Brendan; Williams, Rachel (February 1995). "Attentional bias in anxiety and depression: The role of awareness". British Journal of Clinical Psychology. 34 (1): 17–36. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8260.1995.tb01434.x. PMID   7757037.
  16. 1 2 Field, Matt; Cox, W. Miles (September 2008). "Attentional bias in addictive behaviors: a review of its development, causes, and consequences". Drug and Alcohol Dependence. 97 (1–2): 1–20. doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2008.03.030. PMID   18479844.
  17. ↑ Drobes, David J.; Elibero, Andrea; Evans, David E. (2006). "Attentional bias for smoking and affective stimuli: A Stroop task study". Psychology of Addictive Behaviors. 20 (4): 490–495. doi:10.1037/0893-164X.20.4.490. PMID   17176185.
  18. ↑ Szasz, Paul Lucian; Szentagotai, Aurora; Hofmann, Stefan G. (2012). "Effects of emotion regulation strategies on smoking craving, attentional bias, and task persistence". Behaviour Research and Therapy. 50 (5): 333–340. doi:10.1016/j.brat.2012.02.010. PMID   22459732.
  19. ↑ Yan, Xiaodan; Jiang, Yi; Wang, Jin; Deng, Yuan; He, Sheng; Weng, Xuchu (2009). "Preconscious attentional bias in cigarette smokers: a probe into awareness modulation on attentional bias". Addiction Biology. 14 (4): 478–488. doi:10.1111/j.1369-1600.2009.00172.x. PMID   19740368. S2CID   8704240.
  20. ↑ Canamar, Catherine P.; London, Edythe (2012). "Acute cigarette smoking reduces latencies on a Smoking Stroop test". Addictive Behaviors. 37 (5): 627–631. doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2012.01.017. PMC   3425374 . PMID   22325952.
  21. ↑ Field, Matt; Munafò, Marcus R.; Franken, Ingmar H. A. (2009). "A meta-analytic investigation of the relationship between attentional bias and subjective craving in substance abuse". Psychological Bulletin. 135 (4): 589–607. doi:10.1037/a0015843. PMC   2999821 . PMID   19586163.
  22. ↑ Cane, J.; Sharma, D; Albery, I. (2008). "The addiction Stroop task: examining the fast and slow effects of smoking and marijuana-related cues". Journal of Psychopharmacology. 23 (5): 510–519. doi:10.1177/0269881108091253. PMID   18562413. S2CID   33501853.
  23. ↑ Deckers, Lambert (2018). Motivation (5th ed.). New York: Routledge. pp. 110–111. ISBN   9781351713887.
  24. 1 2 Marissen, M. A. E., Franken, I. H. A., Waters, A. J., Blanken, P., van den Brink, W., & Hendriks, V. M. (2006). Attentional bias predicts heroin relapse following treatment. Addiction, 101(9), 1306–1312.
  25. ↑ Janes, Amy C; Pizzagalli, Diego A; Richardt, Sarah; Frederick, Blaise de B; Holmes, Avram J; Sousa, Jessica; Fava, Maurizio; Evins, A Eden; Kaufman, Marc J (2010). "Neural Substrates of Attentional Bias for Smoking-Related Cues: An fMRI Study". Neuropsychopharmacology. 35 (12): 2339–2345. doi:10.1038/npp.2010.103. PMC   2955848 . PMID   20703221.
  26. ↑ Kang, O-Seok; Chang, Dong-Seon; Jahng, Geon-Ho; Kim, Song-Yi; Kim, Hackjin; Kim, Jong-Woo; Chung, Sun-Yong; Yang, Seung-In; Park, Hi-Joon; Lee, Hyejung; Chae, Younbyoung (2012). "Individual differences in smoking-related cue reactivity in smokers: An eye-tracking and fMRI study". Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry. 38 (2): 285–293. doi:10.1016/j.pnpbp.2012.04.013. PMID   22542509. S2CID   207410111.
  27. ↑ Luijten, Maartje; Veltman, Dick J.; den Brink, Wim van; Hester, Rob; Field, Matt; Smits, Marion; Franken, Ingmar. H.A. (2011). "Neurobiological substrate of smoking-related attentional bias". NeuroImage. 54 (3): 2374–2381. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.09.064. PMID   20932921. S2CID   18057638.
  28. ↑ Stippekohl, Bastian; Walter, Bertram; Winkler, Markus H.; Mucha, Ronald F.; Pauli, Paul; Vaitl, Dieter; Stark, Rudolf (2012). "An early attentional bias to BEGIN-stimuli of the smoking ritual is accompanied with mesocorticolimbic deactivations in smokers". Psychopharmacology. 222 (4): 593–607. doi:10.1007/s00213-012-2670-8. PMID   22476609. S2CID   253751616.
  29. ↑ Beck, Aaron; Clark, David (January 2007). "An information processing model of anxiety: automatic and strategic processes". Behaviour Research and Therapy. 35 (1): 49–58. doi: 10.1016/S0005-7967(96)00069-1 . PMID   9009043.
  30. ↑ Williams, J. M. G.; Watts, F. N.; MacLeod, C.; Mathews, A. (1997). Cognitive psychology and emotional disorders. Wiley. pp. 595–603. ISBN   978-0-471-94430-0.

Further reading

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.