Individual differences in the selective processing of threatening information, and emotional responses to a stressful life event
Abstract
Previous research has established that high levels of trait anxiety commonly are associated with an automatic pattern of encoding selectivity, operating to favour the processing of emotionally threatening information. It has been suggested that this processing bias may play a functional role in mediating emotional vulnerability by moderating affective responses to stressful real life events. The current experiment employs a longitudinal design, capable of addressing the central predictions arising from this theoretical position. Thirty-one women awaiting colposcopy investigation were screened on both traditional questionnaire measures of emotional vulnerability, and on a modified emotional Stroop task that provided objective indices of their automatic and strategic patterns of processing selectivity. Subsequently, those 15 women who later received a diagnosis of cervical pathology reported the degree to which this diagnosis had impaired their level of emotional functioning. The results confirm that, at the initial test time, trait anxiety was indeed associated with an apparently automatic tendency to selectively process threat related distractor information. Furthermore, an index of this initial pattern of automatic processing selectivity was consistently the best predictor of the intensity of emotional distress elicited by the subsequent diagnosis of cervical pathology. None of our conventional questionnaire measures were capable of significantly predicting this later emotio…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Objective measures of cognitive biases have been found to be better at predicting emotional and physiological reactions to stress than self-report measures.
“objective measures of cognitive biases have been found to be better at predicting emotional and physiological reactions to stress than self-report measures”
From Mindfulness Training Alters Emotional Memory Recall Compared to Active Controls: Support for an Emotional Information Processing Model of Mindfulness (2012) · cites this paper as MacLeod and Hagan, 1992
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 23 · Cited by 355
- Authors
- MacLeod, C., & Hagan, R.
- Affiliations
- The University of Western Australia (AU)
- ORCID
- MacLeod, Colin
- Venue
- Behaviour Research and Therapy
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1992-03
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 151-161
- ISSN
- 0005-7967 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1972553927
- Cited by
- 355
- References
- 23
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 18
- FWCI
- 11.49
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Behaviour Research and Therapy (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- UWA Profiles and Research Repository (UWA) (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
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Behavioral Neuroscience › Stress Responses and Cortisol
- Keywords
- trait anxiety, emotional vulnerability, emotional Stroop task, emotional distress, life events, cervical pathology, colposcopy, emotional functioning, women
- MeSH terms
- Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Anxiety, Arousal, Colposcopy, Female, Humans, Individuality, Life Change Events, Middle Aged, Semantics
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