Cited by 111Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesFace Recognition and PerceptionNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Fear of negative evaluation and attentional bias for facial expressions: An event-related study

Rossignol, Mandy, Campanella, Salvatore, Bissot, Cécile, Philippot, Pierre·2013·Brain and Cognition

Abstract

Numerous studies have shown an exacerbation of attentional bias towards threat in anxiety states. However, the cognitive mechanisms responsible for these attentional biases remain largely unknown. Further, the authors outline the need to consider the nature of the attentional processes in operation (hypervigilance, avoidance, or disengagement). We adapted a dot-probe paradigm to record behavioral and electrophysiological responses in 26 participants reporting high or low fear of evaluation, a major component of social anxiety. Pairs of faces including a neutral and an emotional face (displaying anger, fear, disgust, or happiness) were presented during 200 ms and then replaced by a neutral target to discriminate. Results show that anxious participants were characterized by an increased P1 in response to pairs of faces, irrespective of the emotional expression included in the pair. They also showed an increased P2 in response to angry-neutral pairs selectively. Finally, in anxious participants, the P1 response to targets was enhanced when replacing emotional faces, whereas non-anxious subjects showed no difference between the two conditions. These results indicate an early hypervigilance to face stimuli in social anxiety, coupled with difficulty in disengaging from threat and sustained attention to emotional stimuli. They are discussed within the framework of current models of anxiety and psychopathology.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.bandc.2013.05.008

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rossignol, M., Campanella, S., Bissot, C., & Philippot, P.
Affiliations
  • UCLouvain (BE)
  • Université Libre de Bruxelles (BE)
Corresponding author
Rossignol, Mandy
Venue
Brain and Cognition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-08
Volume
82
Issue
3
Pages
344-352
ISSN
0278-2626 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2123909457
Cited by
111
References
77
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 2
FWCI
8.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Brain and Cognition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Dépôt institutionnel de l'Université libre de Bruxelles (Université Libre de Bruxelles) (submittedVersion)
  • DIAL (Catholic University of Leuven) (submittedVersion)
  • ORBi UMONS (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
fear of negative evaluation, social anxiety, attentional bias, facial expressions, threat detection, P1 component, P2 component, dot-probe task, hypervigilance, attentional disengagement, avoidance, emotional face processing, event-related potentials
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Anxiety, Attention, Cerebral Cortex, Choice Behavior, Evoked Potentials, Visual, Facial Expression, Fear, Female, Humans, Male, Young Adult

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