Effects of cognitive load during interpretation bias modification on interpretation bias and stress reactivity

被引:13
作者
Van Bockstaele, Bram [1 ,3 ]
Clarke, Patrick J. F. [2 ]
Notebaert, Lies [3 ]
MacLeod, Colin [3 ]
Salemink, Elske [1 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Amsterdam, Dept Psychol, Nieuwe Achtergracht 129-B, NL-1018 WT Amsterdam, Netherlands
[2] Curtin Univ, Sch Psychol, Kent St, Bentley, WA 6102, Australia
[3] Univ Western Australia, Sch Psychol Sci, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, WA 6009, Australia
[4] Univ Utrecht, Dept Clin Psychol, POB 80140, NL-3508 TC Utrecht, Netherlands
基金
澳大利亚研究理事会;
关键词
Interpretation bias; Cognitive bias modification; Stress reactivity; Secondary load; HEART-RATE-VARIABILITY; ANXIETY; MEMORY; AUTOMATICITY; DEPRESSION; DISORDERS; ATTENTION; BEHAVIOR; THINKING; EMOTION;
D O I
10.1016/j.jbtep.2020.101561
中图分类号
B849 [应用心理学];
学科分类号
040203 ;
摘要
Background and objectives: Interpretation bias modification can affect stress reactivity, yet results have not been consistent. This inconsistency may be partly due to variability in the degree to which training procedures alter interpretation at a more automatic, rather than strategic, level of processing, and a mismatch in available resources between the training and the stress situation. We tested this possibility by investigating whether imposing a secondary cognitive load during interpretation bias modification would strengthen training-induced effects on both interpretation bias and emotional reactivity. Method: We trained 71 participants in a single session to interpret ambiguity either positively or negatively. Half of our participants did so while performing a cognitively demanding secondary task. We assessed the effects of these different training regimes on interpretation bias and both self-reported and physiological indices of stress reactivity. Results: Positive and negative interpretation bias modification resulted in training-congruent changes in interpretation bias. There were no group differences in self-reported stress reactivity, but positive interpretation training did improve recovery from stress as indexed by the heart rate measurement. Countering our hypothesis, the addition of cognitive load during the training increased neither the induced interpretive change nor its emotional impact. Limitations: Sample size was relatively small, though sufficient to detect medium sized effects. Conclusions: Adding cognitive load to interpretation bias modification does not alter training-induced change in interpretation bias or emotional reactivity.
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 36 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1997, Cognitive psychology and emotional disorders
[2]   AN APPROACH TO ARTIFACT IDENTIFICATION - APPLICATION TO HEART PERIOD DATA [J].
BERNTSON, GG ;
QUIGLEY, KS ;
JANG, JF ;
BOYSEN, ST .
PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGY, 1990, 27 (05) :586-598
[3]   Working Memory Regulates Trait Anxiety-Related Threat Processing Biases [J].
Booth, Robert W. ;
Mackintosh, Bundy ;
Sharma, Dinkar .
EMOTION, 2017, 17 (04) :616-627
[4]   A Comparison of Cognitive Bias Modification for Interpretation and Computerized Cognitive Behavior Therapy: Effects on Anxiety, Depression, Attentional Control, and Interpretive Bias [J].
Bowler, Jennifer O. ;
Mackintosh, Bundy ;
Dunn, Barnaby D. ;
Mathews, Andrew ;
Dalgleish, Tim ;
Hoppitt, Laura .
JOURNAL OF CONSULTING AND CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2012, 80 (06) :1021-1033
[5]   Attention bias modification training under working memory load increases the magnitude of change in attentional bias [J].
Clarke, Patrick J. F. ;
Branson, Sonya ;
Chen, Nigel T. M. ;
Van Bockstaele, Bram ;
Salemink, Elske ;
MacLeod, Colin ;
Notebaert, Lies .
JOURNAL OF BEHAVIOR THERAPY AND EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHIATRY, 2017, 57 :25-31
[6]   How can dual-task working memory retention limits be investigated? [J].
Cowan, Nelson ;
Morey, Candice C. .
PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE, 2007, 18 (08) :686-688
[7]   G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences [J].
Faul, Franz ;
Erdfelder, Edgar ;
Lang, Albert-Georg ;
Buchner, Axel .
BEHAVIOR RESEARCH METHODS, 2007, 39 (02) :175-191
[8]   THE TROUBLE OF THINKING - ACTIVATION AND APPLICATION OF STEREOTYPIC BELIEFS [J].
GILBERT, DT ;
HIXON, JG .
JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1991, 60 (04) :509-517
[9]   Confusing procedures with process when appraising the impact of cognitive bias modification on emotional vulnerability [J].
Grafton, Ben ;
MacLeod, Colin ;
Rudaizky, Daniel ;
Holmes, Emily A. ;
Salemink, Elske ;
Fox, Elaine ;
Notebaert, Lies .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY, 2017, 211 (05) :266-271
[10]   Cognitive Bias Modification: Past Perspectives, Current Findings, and Future Applications [J].
Hertel, Paula T. ;
Mathews, Andrew .
PERSPECTIVES ON PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE, 2011, 6 (06) :521-536