Cited by 49Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research

Further evidence of attention bias for negative information in late life depression

Broomfield, Niall M., Davies, Rachel, MacMahon, Kenneth, Ali, Farah, Cross, Susan M. B.·2007·International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry

Abstract

Objectives: Pilot research using the manual (card based) emotional Stroop paradigm shows depressed elders selectively attend negative words, whereas dementia patients do not. The present study aimed to confirm this effect, using a more controlled, computerised, emotional Stroop paradigm, and accounting for co‐morbid anxiety. Method: Nineteen depressed (DEP) and twenty non depressed control participants (CON) completed a computerised Emotional Stroop task. This task involves colour naming individually presented negative, positive and neutral words. Mean participant age was 72.25 years. All participants were free of significant cognitive impairment. Results: Consistent with hypotheses, analysis of variance revealed a general cognitive slowing amongst DEP, and a specific interference effect for negative words, in this group, suggesting attention bias. Conclusions: Previous pilot data are confirmed. The emotional Stroop paradigm may have clinical potential for distinguishing geriatric depression and dementia, although as yet this is far from clear. Detailed development work including comparison with depressed and non depressed Alzheimer's patients, will be necessary to demonstrate diagnostic validity. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/gps.1655

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Broomfield, N. M., Davies, R., MacMahon, K., Ali, F., & Cross, S. M. B.
Affiliations
NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde (GB)
Corresponding author
Broomfield, Niall M.
Venue
International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2006-11-10
Volume
22
Issue
3
Pages
175-180
ISSN
  • 0885-6230 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-1166
OpenAlex
W1967872167
Cited by
49
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UEA Digital Repository (University of East Anglia) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Keywords
attentional bias, geriatric depression, emotional Stroop task, negative words, older adults, cognitive slowing, anxiety comorbidity, dementia, Alzheimer's disease, diagnostic validity, color naming
MeSH terms
Affect, Aged, Analysis of Variance, Anxiety, Attention, Color Perception, Dementia, Depression, Female, Humans, Male, Prejudice, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Reaction Time, Case-Control Studies

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review