Responding to subliminal threat cues is related to trait anxiety and emotional vulnerability: a successful replication of Macleod and Hagan (1992)
Abstract
Macleod and Hagan (1992) [Behaviour Research and Therapy, 30, 151-161] reported that threat-relevant interference on a masked Stroop task, where neutral and negative words cannot be consciously perceived, is positively correlated with trait anxiety and emotional vulnerability to stressful life events. Their findings were obtained from subjects who were currently stressed. The aim of the present study was to determine whether the Macleod and Hagan findings could be replicated in a sample that was not currently stressed. Using a sample of 32 volunteers, we found a significant correlation between trait anxiety and threat-relevant interference on a masked Stroop. Furthermore, it was found that the single best predictor of vulnerability to life stress was the interference on the masked Stroop. The findings of the present study correspond quite closely to those reported by Macleod and Hagan (1992).
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 van den Hout et al., 1995
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 13 · Cited by 117
- Authors
- Van Den Hout, M., Tenney, N., Huygens, K., Merckelbach, H., & Kindt, M.
- Affiliations
- University of Amsterdam (NL)
- Venue
- Behaviour Research and Therapy
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1995-05
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 451-454
- ISSN
- 0005-7967 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2137177975
- Cited by
- 117
- References
- 13
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 4 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 8
- FWCI
- 5.12
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Behaviour Research and Therapy (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (publishedVersion)
- UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (submittedVersion)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Behavioral Neuroscience › Stress Responses and Cortisol
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
- Keywords
- trait anxiety, emotional vulnerability, replication, stress, negative words, emotional reactivity
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Anxiety, Arousal, Attention, Color Perception, Cues, Female, Humans, Male, Perceptual Defense, Perceptual Masking, Personality Inventory, Semantics, Subliminal Stimulation, Reproducibility of Results
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
