Ben Grafton

Always Look on the Bright Side of Life: The Attentional Basis of Positive Affectivity

There is now reliable evidence that heightened positive affectivity is associated with a distinctive pattern of attentional selectivity, favouring emotionally positive information. While this has invited speculation that differential attentional responding to positive information may directly contribute to the determination of this emotional temperament, the causal basis of their association as yet remains unknown. We addressed this issue by experimentally manipulating selective attentional response to positive information, using a cognitive bias modification variant of the attentional probe task, and examining the impact of this attentional manipulation on positive emotional reactivity to a subsequent success experience. The findings support the hypothesis that individual differences in selective attentional response to positive information can make a causal contribution to variation in positive affectivity. Copyright

Anxiety-linked attentional bias and its modification: Illustrating the importance of distinguishing processes and procedures in experimental psychopathology research

In this review of research concerning anxiety-linked attentional bias, we seek to illustrate a general principle that we contend applies across the breadth of experimental psychopathology. Specifically, we highlight how maintenance of a clear distinction between process and procedure serves to enhance the advancement of knowledge and understanding, while failure to maintain this distinction can foster confusion and misconception. We show how such clear differentiation has permitted the continuous refinement of assessment procedures, in ways that have led to growing confidence in the existence of the putative attentional bias process of interest, and also increasing understanding of its nature. In contrast, we show how a failure to consistently differentiate between process and procedure has contributed to confusion concerning whether or not attentional bias modification reliably alters anxiety vulnerability and dysfunction. As we demonstrate, such confusion can be avoided by distinguishing the process of attentional bias modification from the procedures that have been employed with the intention of evoking this target process. Such an approach reveals that procedures adopted with the intention of eliciting the attentional bias modification process do not always do so, but that successful evocation of the attentional bias modification process quite reliably alters anxiety symptomatology. We consider some of the specific implications for future research concerning attentional bias modification, while also pointing to the broader implications for experimental psychopathology research in general.

When Ignorance is Bliss: Explicit Instruction and the Efficacy of CBM-A for Anxiety

AbstractThere is growing evidence that cognitive bias modification procedures targeting attention (CBM-A) can alter anxiety reactivity in the laboratory, and also can yield therapeutic benefits for clinically anxious patients. These promising findings underscore the need for investigators to delineate the conditions under which CBM-A procedures are effective. In the present research we conducted two studies to empirically determine whether CBM-A continues to be effective when participants are informed of the training contingency and instructed to actively practice the target pattern of attentional selectivity. These studies were designed to address two key questions relating to this issue. First, if participants are informed of the training contingency and instructed to practice the target pattern of attentional selectivity, then will the CBM-A manipulation still effectively modify attentional response to negative information? Second, if it does still modify attentional response to negative information under these conditions, then will this change in attentional selectivity still serve to alter anxiety responses to a stressful experience? The results indicate that when participants are informed of the training contingency and instructed to practice the target pattern of attentional selectivity, then the CBM-A manipulation continues to exert an impact on attentional selectivity, but this modification of attentional bias no longer affects anxiety reactivity to a subsequent stressor. We discuss both the theoretical and practical implications of these findings.

Validation of a novel attentional bias modification task: The future may be in the cards

Attentional bias modification (ABM) is a promising therapeutic tool aimed at changing patterns of attentional selectivity associated with heightened anxiety. A number of studies have successfully implemented ABM using the modified dot-probe task. However others have not achieved the attentional change required to achieve emotional benefits, highlighting the need for new ABM methods. The current study compared the effectiveness of a newly developed ABM task against the traditional dot-probe ABM task. The new person-identity-matching (PIM) task presented participants with virtual cards, each depicting a happy and angry person. The task encourages selective attention toward or away from threat by requiring participants to make matching judgements between two cards, based either on the identities of the happy faces, or of the angry faces. Change in attentional bias achieved by both ABM tasks was measured by a dot-probe assessment task. Their impact on emotional vulnerability was assessed by measuring negative emotional reactions to a video stressor. The PIM task succeeded in modifying attentional bias, and exerting an impact on emotional reactivity, whereas this was not the case for the dot-probe task. These results are considered in relation to the potential clinical utility of the current task in comparison to traditional ABM methodologies.

Enhanced probing of attentional bias: The independence of anxiety-linked selectivity in attentional engagement with and disengagement from negative information

Cognitive models of anxiety posit that an attentional bias to negative information plays a causal role in elevated anxiety vulnerability and dysfunction. There has been considerable recent interest in determining whether this attentional bias reflects facilitated attentional engagement with and/or impaired attentional disengagement from negative information. We concur with the claim of investigators who have noted that the methodologies previously employed to dissociate engagement and disengagement biases are not optimal for this purpose. In the present study, we employ a novel methodology, the Attentional Response to Distal vs. Proximal Emotional Information (ARDPEI) task, which enables the discrete assessment of these two types of attentional selectivity. The findings demonstrate that facilitated attentional engagement with and impaired attentional disengagement from negative information both characterise elevated anxiety vulnerability. Further, these biases represent distinctive facets of anxiety-linked attentional selectivity. We discuss the potentially differing roles that engagement and disengagement biases may play in the development and/or maintenance of anxiety vulnerability and dysfunction.

Integrating Personality Structure, Personality Process, and Personality Development

In this target article, we argue that personality processes, personality structure, and personality development have to be understood and investigated in integrated ways in order to provide comprehensive responses to the key questions of personality psychology. The psychological processes and mechanisms that explain concrete behaviour in concrete situations should provide explanation for patterns of variation across situations and individuals, for development over time as well as for structures observed in intra–individual and inter–individual differences. Personality structures, defined as patterns of covariation in behaviour, including thoughts and feelings, are results of those processes in transaction with situational affordances and regularities. It cannot be presupposed that processes are organized in ways that directly correspond to the observed structure. Rather, it is an empirical question whether shared sets of processes are uniquely involved in shaping correlated behaviours, but not uncorrelated behaviours (what we term ‘correspondence’ throughout this paper), or whether more complex interactions of processes give rise to population–level patterns of covariation (termed ‘emergence’). The paper is organized in three parts, with part I providing the main arguments, part II reviewing some of the past approaches at (partial) integration, and part III outlining conclusions of how future personality psychology should progress towards complete integration. Working definitions for the central terms are provided in the appendix. Copyright

The ups and downs of cognitive bias: Dissociating the attentional characteristics of positive and negative affectivity

Despite considerable past interest in distinguishing the patterns of attentional bias that characterise vulnerability to anxiety and to depression, little research has yet sought to delineate the attentional correlates of two affective dimensions that differentially contribute to these alternative forms of emotional vulnerability—negative and positive affectivity. In the present study, we employ a novel variant of the attentional probe task to examine selective attentional engagement with, and disengagement from, negative words, in participants whose heightened emotional vulnerability reflects either elevated negative affectivity, or attenuated positive affectivity. Elevated negative affectivity was found to be associated with both increased attentional engagement with, and impaired attentional disengagement from, negative information, especially when this was anxiety relevant. In contrast, attenuated positive affectivity was associated with facilitated attentional disengagement from negative information, especially when this was depression relevant. We discuss how this new insight into the attentional characteristics of negative and positive affectivity may serve to illuminate the basis of previously observed discrepancies between the patterns of attentional selectivity observed in anxious and in depressed participants.

Confusing procedures with process when appraising the impact of cognitive bias modification on emotional vulnerability

If meta-analysis is to provide valuable answers, then it is critical to ensure clarity 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 als conclusions in light of these findings.

Stuck in a sad place: Biased attentional disengagement in rumination

Previous research has demonstrated that heightened ruminative disposition is characterized by an attentional bias to depressogenic information at 1,000-ms exposure durations. However, it is unknown whether this attentional bias reflects facilitated attentional engagement with depressogenic information, or impaired attentional disengagement from such information. The present study was designed to address this question. In keeping with recent theoretical proposals, our findings demonstrate that heightened ruminative disposition is associated only with impaired attentional disengagement from depressogenic information, and does not involve facilitated attentional engagement with such information. In addition to resolving this key issue, the present study provided converging support for the previous claim that rumination-linked attentional bias is specific to depressogenic information, and also lends weight to the contention that rumination-linked attentional bias may be evident only when controlled attentional processing is readily permitted by using stimulus exposure durations of 1,000 ms. We discuss the theoretical implications of these findings and highlight key issues for future research.

Cognitive bias modification to prevent depression (COPE): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

BackgroundDepression is a leading cause of disability worldwide and, although efficacious treatments are available, their efficacy is suboptimal and recurrence of symptoms is common. Effective preventive strategies could reduce disability and the long term social and health complications associated with the disorder, but current options are limited. Cognitive bias modification (CBM) is a novel, simple, and safe intervention that addresses attentional and interpretive biases associated with anxiety, dysphoria, and depression. The primary aim of this trial is to determine if CBM decreases the one-year onset of a major depressive episode among adults with subsyndromal depression.Design and methodsThis randomised controlled trial will recruit 532 adults with subsyndromal symptoms of depression living in the Australian community (parallel design, 1:1 allocation ratio). Participants will be free of clinically significant symptoms of depression and of psychotic disorders, sensory and cognitive impairment, and risky alcohol use. The CBM intervention will target attentional and interpretive biases associated with depressive symptoms. The sessions will be delivered via the internet over a period of 52 weeks. The primary outcome of interest is the onset of a major depressive episode according the DSM-IV-TR criteria over a 12-month period. Secondary outcomes of interest include change in the severity of depressive symptoms as measured by the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), use of antidepressants or benzodiazepines, and changes in attention and interpretive biases. The assessment of outcomes will take place 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after randomisation and will occur via the internet.DiscussionWe propose to test the efficacy of an innovative intervention that is well grounded in theory and for which increasing empirical evidence for an effect on mood is available. The intervention is simple, inexpensive, easy to access, and could be easily rolled out into practice if our findings confirm a role for CBM in the prevention of depression.Trial registrationAustralian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12613001334796. Date: 5th December 2013.