Cited by 49Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesVisual Attention and Saliency Detection

Attentional bias modification facilitates attentional control mechanisms: Evidence from eye tracking

Open access
Chen, Nigel T.M., Clarke, Patrick J.F., Watson, Tamara L., MacLeod, Colin, Guastella, Adam J.·2015·Biological Psychology

Abstract

Social anxiety is thought to be maintained by biased attentional processing towards threatening information. Research has further shown that the experimental attenuation of this bias, through the implementation of attentional bias modification (ABM), may serve to reduce social anxiety vulnerability. However, the mechanisms underlying ABM remain unclear. The present study examined whether inhibitory attentional control was associated with ABM. A non-clinical sample of participants was randomly assigned to receive either ABM or a placebo task. To assess pre-post changes in attentional control, participants were additionally administered an emotional antisaccade task. ABM participants exhibited a subsequent shift in attentional bias away from threat as expected. ABM participants further showed a subsequent decrease in antisaccade cost, indicating a general facilitation of inhibitory attentional control. Mediational analysis revealed that the shift in attentional bias following ABM was independent to the change in attentional control. The findings suggest that the mechanisms of ABM are multifaceted.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2014.12.002

Cites

50 of 50 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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
Chen, N. T. M., Clarke, P. J. F., Watson, T. L., MacLeod, C., & Guastella, A. J.
Affiliations
  • The University of Sydney (AU)
  • The University of Western Australia (AU)
  • Western Sydney University (AU)
Corresponding author
Chen, Nigel T.M.
Venue
Biological Psychology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-01
Volume
104
Pages
139-146
ISSN
0301-0511 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2062573639
Cited by
49
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 3
FWCI
6.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Biological Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UWA Profiles and Research Repository (UWA) (submittedVersion)
  • eSpace (Curtin University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Australian Research Council (ARC) (LP110200562)
  • Romanian National Authority for Scientific Research, CNCS – UEFISCDI
  • ARC (DP110102173)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Visual Attention and Saliency Detection
Keywords
attentional bias modification, social anxiety, attentional control, inhibitory control, threat processing, placebo effect
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Attention, Emotions, Eye Movements, Female, Humans, Male, Thinking, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, 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