Beck’s cognitive model of anxiety
Bower’s associative network model of memory
measuring attentional bias
emotional stroop task
criticism: color-naming interference observed for threatening words could be due to other non-attentional processing - e.g. behavioral interference or avoidance
measuring attentional bias
dichotic listening task
Criticism/issue: has been argued that awareness is influenced by a host of different processes where it is difficult to assure that stimuli cannot be perceived consciously
measuring attentional bias
dot probe task
measuring attentional bias
visual search task
advantages:
many stimuli are presented simultaneously - requires an active search process of participants
+
speed of the target search in relation to the number of distracting stimuli allows examining whether threatening info “pops out”
measuring attentional bias
spatial cueing task
measuring attentional bias
eye tracking
nature of attentional bias
the automaticity of attentional bias
AB is an automatic process that is based on a very fast evaluation mechanism that operates at a preconscious level
Other theorists refuted this claim by highlighting that AB to threat occurs because of the link between specific stimuli (e.g., angry faces) and individuals’ goals (e.g., avoiding rejection)
* goals are highly relevant in the deployment of attention
* presence of goal-relevant stimuli can override AB to threat, even in high trait anxious individuals
nature of attentional bias
the time course of attentional bias to threat
at early stages most research seems to suggest that attention is oriented more toward threat in high-anxious individuals
At later processing stages attention is oriented away from threat.
this had been labelled Vigilance-avoidance pattern of attentional bias: is argued to explain how initial AB to threat causes elevated anxiety with the attentional avoidance interfering with subsequent habituation
Eysenck (1992) suggested that high-anxious individuals initially show broad scanning of the env for threat, followed by a narrowed focus of attention to threat upon detection, combined with difficulties to disengage attention away from threat
3 key research lines into AB & developing AD
developmental studies
Anxiety disorders having their origin in childhood is debated
Challenging to study in youth because:
* more variability in response times = RT as outcome variable difficult
* maturational processes in exec functions may influence expression of AB = difficult to include many age ranges
* many studies use slightly different task parameters = makes studies difficult to compare
Abend et al., (2018): Positive correlation was found between attentional bias to threat & severity of overall anxiety symptoms
* Although significant, this correlation was small (r < 0.1), where associations appeared most pronounced for social anxiety and school phobia
3 key research lines into AB & developing AD
developmental studies - behavioral inhibition & effortful control
behavioral inhibition (temperamental factor): several studies found a prospective association between behavioral inhibition & AB on later-stage ADs
Effortful control = the ability to activate or inhibit behavior and voluntarily deploy attention as required to better adaptively fit the context
- Children who are able to efficiently shift attention: can more readily disengage their attention from threat → could help them to counteract or override AB to threat
3 key research lines into AB & developing AD
prospective studies
examine whether AB measured at an initial time point can predict subsequent emotional reactivity & state anxiety
- latter variable serves as a proxy for the vulnerability to develop anxiety disorders
The current data are in line with the idea that attentional bias to threat may increase the vulnerability to anxiety, yet this link needs to be established more definitively in larger-scale studies
3 key research lines into AB & developing AD
experimental manipulation
Attentional bias modification (ABM): results seem to suggest that AB plays a causal role in the maintenance of anxiety disorders
no conclusions can be drawn with regard to AB as an etiological factor since it is not clear whether an induced AB operates in the same way as a naturally occurring AB
major theoretical models for AB in anxiety
Biased attentional directional account (Williams et al)
Stimulus input is initially appraised (automatically) as threatening or nonthreatening through an affective decision mechanism
Outcome of this decision process: feeds into a resource allocation mechanism where the direction of attention to threat is determined
* is influenced by trait mechanism: high trait anxiety individuals have tendency to attend to threat & low have tendency to avoid threat
major theoretical models for AB in anxiety
cognitive-motivational model (mogg & bradley)
Attention to highly threatening stimuli is crucial for survival = proposed that incoming info is appraised with a valence-evaluation system - a crude evaluation of stimuli being either low or highly threatening
* Stimulus appraised as low threatening = current attention to ongoing task & behavior is maintained
* Stimulus appraised as highly threatening = ongoing behavior is interrupted and attention is allocated to threat in order to further process this info
major theoretical models for AB in anxiety
self-regulatory executive function model (wells & matthews)
developed a different view with this model → argue that ABs are linked to top-down processes instead of the more automatic processes in the aforementioned models
Trait anxiety is linked to neg beliefs & problems at the level of exec control - argue that the evidence for unconscious, fully automatic threat bias is very limited
major theoretical models for AB in anxiety
attentional control theory (eysenck et al)
the key role of extinction learning in anxiety disorders
what is extinction of fear
occurs when fear decreases during repeated exposure to a previously CS which is now presented in the absence of the US
the key role of extinction learning in anxiety disorders
extinction learning & return of fear
extinction learning = creating new memory that feared stimulus is actually safe
The og fear association & the extinction association compete → the CS becomes an ambiguous stimulus
Extinction associations are typically weaker compared to the og fear association = recurrence of conditioned fear responding can occur with:
* Representation of the US = reinstatement
* Change of surrounding context = renewal
* Passage of time = spontaneous recovery
People w ADs show impaired extinction learning & memory
strategies to enhance exposure-based treatments
procedural strategies
strategies to enhance exposure-based treatments
flanking strategies
Flanking strategies: aim to provide conditions that support learning during extinction, consolidation of the extinction memory, and retrieval of this memory
* Positive affect induction: recently been discussed as another strategy before extinction training → may be beneficial for extinction learning into therapeutic strategies
* sleep is another strategy
criticisms of early conditioning models for phobias
learning pathways to phobias
criticism: many people with phobias do not appear to have had a history of classical conditioning with their phobic object
* Vicarious threat learning = the acquisition of CRs via observational means
* instructional threat learning might be effective in the acquisition of fears (wagner’s SOP model)
* also, patients often report a conscious knowledge that a feared stimulus is safe, yet they find that this understanding is not sufficient to extinguish their fearful reactions
criticisms of early conditioning models for phobias
individual differences
criticsm: many who endure traumatic experiences do not go on to develop phobias
* some people have a genetic vulnerability to phobias
* Personality could affect individual predisposition to phobias by affecting the speed, strength, and/or extinction of CRs - bheavioral inhibition, trait anxiety & neuroticism all increase likelihood