| 1. |
- Clarke, Patrick J. F., et al.
(författare)
-
Simply Imagining Sunshine, Lollipops and Rainbows Will Not Budge the Bias : The Role of Ambiguity in Interpretive Bias Modification
- 2014
-
Ingår i: Cognitive Therapy and Research. - : SPRINGER/PLENUM PUBLISHERS. - 0147-5916 .- 1573-2819. ; 38:2, s. 120-131
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Imagery-based interpretive bias modification (CBM-I) involves repeatedly imagining scenarios that are initially ambiguous before being resolved as either positive or negative in the last word/s. While the presence of such ambiguity is assumed to be important to achieve change in selective interpretation, it is also possible that the act of repeatedly imagining positive or negative events could produce such change in the absence of ambiguity. The present study sought to examine whether the ambiguity in imagery-based CBM-I is necessary to elicit change in interpretive bias, or, if the emotional content of the imagined scenarios is sufficient to produce such change. An imagery-based CBM-I task was delivered to participants in one of four conditions, where the valence of imagined scenarios were either positive or negative, and the ambiguity of the scenario was either present (until the last word/s) or the ambiguity was absent (emotional valence was evident from the start). Results indicate that only those who received scenarios in which the ambiguity was present acquired an interpretive bias consistent with the emotional valence of the scenarios, suggesting that the act of imagining positive or negative events will only influence patterns of interpretation when the emotional ambiguity is a consistent feature.
|
|
| 2. |
- Grafton, Ben, et al.
(författare)
-
Confusing procedures with process when appraising the impact of cognitive bias modification on emotional vulnerability
- 2017
-
Ingår i: British Journal of Psychiatry. - : CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS. - 0007-1250 .- 1472-1465. ; 211:5, s. 266-271
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- If meta-analysis is to provide valuable answers, then it is critical to ensure clarify about the questions being asked. Here, we distinguish two important questions concerning cognitive bias modification research that are not differentiated in the meta-analysis recently published by Cristea et al (2015) in this journal: (1) do the varying procedures that investigators have employed with the intention of modifying cognitive bias, on average, significantly impact emotional vulnerability?; and (2) does the process of successfully modifying cognitive bias, on average, significantly impact emotional vulnerability? We reanalyse the data from Cristea et al to address this latter question. Our new analyses demonstrate that successfully modifying cognitive bias does significantly alter emotional vulnerability. We revisit Cristea et al's conclusions in light of these findings.
|
|
| 3. |
- Notebaert, Lies, et al.
(författare)
-
When we should worry more : using cognitive bias modification to drive adaptive health behaviour.
- 2014
-
Ingår i: PLOS ONE. - : Public Library of Science (PLoS). - 1932-6203. ; 9:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- A lack of behavioural engagement in health promotion or disease prevention is a problem across many health domains. In these cases where people face a genuine danger, a reduced focus on threat and low levels of anxiety or worry are maladaptive in terms of promoting protection or prevention behaviour. Therefore, it is possible that increasing the processing of threat will increase worry and thereby enhance engagement in adaptive behaviour. Laboratory studies have shown that cognitive bias modification (CBM) can increase or decrease anxiety and worry when increased versus decreased processing of threat is encouraged. In the current study, CBM for interpretation (CBM-I) is used to target engagement in sun protection behaviour. The goal was to investigate whether inducing a negative rather than a positive interpretation bias for physical threat information can enhance worry elicited when viewing a health campaign video (warning against melanoma skin cancer), and consequently lead to more adaptive behaviour (sun protection). Participants were successfully trained to either adopt a positive or negative interpretation bias using physical threat scenarios. However, contrary to expectations results showed that participants in the positive training condition reported higher levels of worry elicited by the melanoma video than participants in the negative training condition. Video elicited worry was, however, positively correlated with a measure of engagement in sun protection behaviour, suggesting that higher levels of worry do promote adaptive behaviour. These findings imply that more research is needed to determine under which conditions increased versus decreased processing of threat can drive adaptive worry. Various potential explanations for the current findings and suggestions for future research are discussed.
|
|
