Attentional bias for threat: Crisis or opportunity?

IF 12.2 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Clinical Psychology Review Pub Date : 2019-04-01 DOI:10.1016/j.cpr.2018.05.005
Richard J. McNally
{"title":"Attentional bias for threat: Crisis or opportunity?","authors":"Richard J. McNally","doi":"10.1016/j.cpr.2018.05.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Beginning in the 1980s, experimental psychopathologists increasingly adapted the concepts and paradigms of cognitive science<span><span><span> to elucidate information-processing abnormalities that may figure in the etiology and maintenance of anxiety disorders. Assessment and modification of attentional biases for threat has been a major theme in this research program. The field has witnessed the development of progressively more sophisticated approaches for isolating attentional processes from other cognitive processes in the service of accurate assessment and </span>treatment. Yet the field is now in crisis as foundational concerns about the reliability of basic measures of attentional bias for threat (ABT) have emerged. Moreover, recent research points to theoretical revisions deemphasizing ABT as a stable, near-universal feature of anxiety disorders, and stressing deficits in executive control as the primary </span>attentional problem linked to anxiety.</span></p></div>","PeriodicalId":48458,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Psychology Review","volume":"69 ","pages":"Pages 4-13"},"PeriodicalIF":12.2000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.cpr.2018.05.005","citationCount":"171","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272735817304014","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 171

Abstract

Beginning in the 1980s, experimental psychopathologists increasingly adapted the concepts and paradigms of cognitive science to elucidate information-processing abnormalities that may figure in the etiology and maintenance of anxiety disorders. Assessment and modification of attentional biases for threat has been a major theme in this research program. The field has witnessed the development of progressively more sophisticated approaches for isolating attentional processes from other cognitive processes in the service of accurate assessment and treatment. Yet the field is now in crisis as foundational concerns about the reliability of basic measures of attentional bias for threat (ABT) have emerged. Moreover, recent research points to theoretical revisions deemphasizing ABT as a stable, near-universal feature of anxiety disorders, and stressing deficits in executive control as the primary attentional problem linked to anxiety.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
威胁的注意偏向:危机还是机会?
从20世纪80年代开始,实验精神病理学家越来越多地采用认知科学的概念和范式来阐明可能与焦虑症的病因和维持有关的信息处理异常。威胁注意偏差的评估和修正一直是本研究项目的一个主要主题。该领域已经见证了越来越复杂的方法的发展,这些方法将注意力过程与其他认知过程隔离开来,以服务于准确的评估和治疗。然而,随着对威胁注意偏差(ABT)基本测量方法可靠性的根本性担忧的出现,该领域现在正处于危机之中。此外,最近的研究指出,理论修正不再强调ABT是焦虑障碍的一个稳定的、近乎普遍的特征,而强调执行控制缺陷是与焦虑相关的主要注意力问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical Psychology Review
Clinical Psychology Review PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
23.10
自引率
1.60%
发文量
65
期刊介绍: Clinical Psychology Review serves as a platform for substantial reviews addressing pertinent topics in clinical psychology. Encompassing a spectrum of issues, from psychopathology to behavior therapy, cognition to cognitive therapies, behavioral medicine to community mental health, assessment, and child development, the journal seeks cutting-edge papers that significantly contribute to advancing the science and/or practice of clinical psychology. While maintaining a primary focus on topics directly related to clinical psychology, the journal occasionally features reviews on psychophysiology, learning therapy, experimental psychopathology, and social psychology, provided they demonstrate a clear connection to research or practice in clinical psychology. Integrative literature reviews and summaries of innovative ongoing clinical research programs find a place within its pages. However, reports on individual research studies and theoretical treatises or clinical guides lacking an empirical base are deemed inappropriate for publication.
期刊最新文献
Evaluation of outcome measures for assessing problematic pornography use: A COSMIN systematic review of measurement properties Ketamine-assisted psychotherapies for mental disorders: A historical overview and systematic review Cognitive bias modification in alcohol use disorder and problematic drinking: A revised and updated IPD Bayesian meta-analysis Treatment modifiers of interpersonal functioning in psychotherapy for people with borderline personality disorder: Systematic review with meta-analyses of individual participant data Waiting for translation: A review of translational research in psychological treatment
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1