Anxiety and attention to threat: Cognitive mechanisms and treatment with attention bias modification

In the paper

“In two ABM studies of patients with PTSD, control attention training (visualprobe-training task with probes equally likely to replace threat and nonthreat cues) reduced PTSD symptoms and AB variability, but did not affect the standard AB index at 500 ms (which showed no overall bias to threat across both studies in PTSD patients).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Badura-Brack et al., 2015 source

In the paper

“Regression analyses indicated that fear disorder was independently associated with greater AB variability at 200 ms and 500 ms (which suggested rapid fluctuations between vigilance and avoidance), and also with increased AB to threat on the standard AB index at 200 ms, but not 500 ms.”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Zvielli et al., 2014 source

In the paper

“As noted earlier, a major problem for ABM research is that the overall efficacy of ABM-threat-avoidance training seems weak, with some studies reporting that it reduces both AB and anxiety, while others report no effect on either outcome, particularly when used in home settings (Cristea, Kok et al., 2015;MacLeod & Clarke, 2015), which limits its utility.”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Cristea, Kok et al., 2015
• Not checked yetcites MacLeod & Clarke, 2015

In the paper

“Findings from these studies indicate that ABM-positive-search training reduces self-reported stress and cortisol measures of stress reactivity in adults (Dandeneau et al., 2007), social anxiety symptoms in youth (De Voogd et al., 2014) and clinician-rated symptom severity of anxiety disorders in children (Waters et al., 2013(Waters et al., , 2015(Waters et al., , 2016)).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Dandeneau et al., 2007 source
• Not checked yetcites De Voogd et al., 2014 source
• Not checked yetcites Waters et al., 2013 source

In the paper

“Meta-analytic findings from free-viewing studies indicate a bias in initial orienting towards threat, but not in maintenance of gaze on threat in anxiety (Armstrong & Olatunji, 2012).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Armstrong & Olatunji, 2012 source

In the paper

“Evidence from eye-tracking and visual-probe studies suggests that while anxiety relates to increased initial orienting to threat, depression relates more to maintaining spatial attention on negative information (Armstrong & Olatunji, 2012;Caseras, Garner, Bradley, & Mogg, 2007;Gotlib & Jormann, 2010;Mogg & Bradley, 2005;Mogg, Millar, & Bradley, 2000).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Armstrong & Olatunji, 2012 source
• Not checked yetcites Caseras et al., 2007 source
• Not checked yetcites Mogg & Bradley, 2005 source

In the paper

“Recent visual-probe-task studies of anxious children suggest that AB towards threat is associated with high internalising (anxiety and depression) symptoms in disorderfree children and in those with distress-related disorders such as generalised anxiety disorder; whereas AB away from threat (avoidance) is found in children who have both high internalising symptoms and fear-related disorders (Salum”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Salum et al., 2013 source
• Not checked yetcites Waters, Bradley & Mogg, 2014

In the paper

“While stressors characteristically increase state anxiety and emotional distress, they have mixed effects on ABs to threat.”

In the paper

“One such potential intervention is attention bias modification (ABM), a computer-delivered treatment for anxiety that emerged from research in experimental psychopathology (MacLeod & Mathews, 2012;MacLeod, Rutherford, Campbell, Ebsworthy, & Holker, 2002).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites MacLeod & Mathews, 2012
• Not checked yetcites MacLeod et al., 2002 source

In the paper

“Only one study in the metaanalysis used ABM-positive-search training with a clinically anxious sample, and that showed significant improvement in anxiety symptoms (Waters et al., 2013).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Waters et al., 2013 source

In the paper

“although a recent review, which considers subsequent research, suggests that the relationship between anxiety and AB is less consistent than indicated by this meta-analysis (Van Bockstaele et al., 2014).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Van Bockstaele et al., 2014 source

In the paper

“While medication and cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) are effective for anxiety disorders (Bandelow et al., 2015;Olatunji, Cisler, & Deacon, 2010), these treatments have limitations, such as drug side-effects and drug dependence, and modest efficacy as only about half of anxiety sufferers respond successfully to CBT (Hofmann, Asnaani, Vonk, Sawyer, & Fang, 2012).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Bandelow et al., 2015 source
• Not checked yetcites Olatunji, Cisler, & Deacon, 2010 source
• Not checked yetcites Hofmann et al., 2012 source

In the paper

“According to some cognitive models of anxiety (Williams, Watts, MacLeod, & Mathews, 1988, 1997), individuals who have an enduring bias to automatically direct attention towards threat are prone to develop and experience chronic anxiety; whereas those with reduced susceptibility to anxiety (low trait anxiety) have the opposite bias, i.e., to avoid attending to threat.”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Williams et al., 1988, 1997

In the paper

“Another approach encourages active attention search for positive cues (ABM-positive-search training) and is potentially suitable for all anxious individuals (see Fig. 1, lower panel).”

In the paper

“Clinical anxiety is a common debilitating problem which is difficult to treat.Over a quarter of the population suffers from an anxiety disorder during their lifetime (Kessler et al., 2005).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Kessler et al., 2005 source

In the paper

“For example, the meta-analysis by Mogoas ¸e et al. (2014), which found a small effect of ABM on symptoms, examined 43 controlled trials, with over 2000 participants providing 47 group comparisons.”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Mogoas et al., 2014

In the paper

“High trait anxious individuals have attention and interpretation biases favouring threat information, repressors (low trait anxious individuals with high social desirability scores) have opposite biases, and low trait anxious individuals (who have low social desirability scores) have no biases.”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Eysenck, 1997

In the paper

“This view was developed into Eysenck's (1997) four-factor theory which proposed that four sources of information contribute to anxiety: external stimuli, physiological activity, behaviour action tendencies, and cognitions such as worries (Fig. 2f).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Eysenck, 1997

In the paper

“According to the 1997 model,”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Williams et al., 1997

In the paper

“Specifically, high trait anxious individuals have an enduring tendency to direct attention towards threat, whereas low trait anxious individuals have a bias to direct attention away from threat (i.e., attentional avoidance).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Williams et al., 1988, 1997

In the paper

“However, if conditions allow attention control to modify this initial bias, the resulting AB towards threat may be more variable and likely to depend on individual differences in trait attention control.”

In the paper

“This model also suggests that early AB towards threat increases vulnerability to and maintenance of anxiety disorders.”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Williams et al., 1988, 1997

In the paper

“It may also maintain anxiety, as anxiety-prone individuals are more likely to notice minor threat cues in the environment, which enhances their perception of the world as aversive and unsafe, and increases their state anxiety.”

In the paper

“Beck and Clark propose that anxiety reflects the ineffective use of effortful processing in counteracting threat-related schema-driven processing.”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Beck & Clark, 1997 source

In the paper

“The model also incorporates the vigilance-avoidance hypothesis (Mogg et al., 1987): i.e., the initial AB towards threat may be opposed by avoidance in controlled attention strategies, which may reflect an attempt to reduce subjective discomfort or danger (e.g., averting gaze from horrific scene, escape); so avoidance may be more apparent at higher levels of threat or anxiety.”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Mogg et al., 1987 source

In the paper

“However, low trait anxious individuals are unlikely to direct attention away from severe or real threats; instead, as stimulus threat value increases, low trait anxious individuals show greater attention to threat, rather than greater avoidance (Mogg & Bradley, 1998;Mogg, Bradley et al., 2000;Mogg, McNamara et al., 2000;Mogg, Millar, Bradley, 2000;Wilson & MacLeod, 2003).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Mogg & Bradley, 1998 source
• Not checked yetcites Mogg, Bradley et al., 2000
• Not checked yetcites Wilson & MacLeod, 2003

In the paper

“High state anxious individuals were slower to respond to probes that appeared in a different location to threat cues (invalid-threat; Fig. 1, middle panel), than to probes that appeared in a different location to nonthreat cues (invalid-nonthreat), suggesting difficulty disengaging spatial attention from threat.”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Fox et al., 2001 source

In the paper

“Ohman's (1993Ohman's ( , 1994) ) model proposes that fear and anxiety depend on a specialised cognitive mechanism which has evolved to detect danger (Fig. 2d).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Ohman, 1993, 1994

In the paper

“Evidence of automatic threat evaluation includes physiological responses to pictures of masked fear-related stimuli (e.g., snakes, spiders; € Ohman & Soares, 1993, 1994), and amygdala response to unattended or masked threat cues such as fearful or angry faces (e.g., Dolan & Vuillemier, 2003;LeDoux, 1996;Monk et al., 2008; see Section 4.3.1).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Ohman & Soares, 1993, 1994
• Not checked yetcites Dolan & Vuillemier, 2003 source
• Not checked yetcites LeDoux, 1996

In the paper

“Developmental research indicates that risk of emotional disorders is higher in individuals with high trait negative affectivity (including anxious/fearful temperament) and lower in those with high trait effortful control (Derryberry & Rothbart, 1997;Rothbart, Derryberry, & Posner, 1994).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Derryberry & Rothbart, 1997
• Not checked yetcites Rothbart, Derryberry, & Posner, 1994

In the paper

“Regarding the vigilance-avoidance hypothesis, while many studies indicate enhanced initial AB to threat in anxiety (e.g., Bar-Haim et al., 2007), evidence of avoidance is more limited and variable (e.g., for a review see Cisler & Koster, 2010; variables influencing ABs towards and away from threat are discussed later, Sections 4.4.2e4.4.6).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Bar-Haim et al., 2007 source
• Not checked yetcites Cisler & Koster, 2010 source

In the paper

“According to Beck et al.'s (1985) schema model, anxiety is characterised by hypervalent danger schemas (cognitive representations of threat) which act as a filter on information processing, resulting in interpretative, attentional and memory biases which favour threat-related information.”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Beck et al., 1985

In the paper

“Some recent evidence suggests that anxiety enhances working memory storage of task-irrelevant threat information; with anxiety and worry being related to greater difficulty in filtering out task-irrelevant threat cues from working memory (Stout, Shackman, & Larson, 2013;Stout, Shackman, Johnson, & Larson, 2015).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Stout, Shackman, & Larson, 2013
• Not checked yetcites Stout, Shackman, Johnson, & Larson, 2015

In the paper

“Consequently, AB for threat reflects conflicting influences of fearful/anxious temperament (which enhances cognitive representations of threat) and trait effortful control, which opposes the allocation of attention to task-irrelevant threat stimuli (Derryberry & Rothbart, 1997).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Derryberry & Rothbart, 1997

In the paper

“While avoidant attention strategies may reduce immediate distress, they may be unhelpful in the long-term by interfering with habituation and thus maintaining anxiety.”

In the paper

“Based on their review of cognitive neuroscience evidence, Corbetta and Shulman (2002) described two main attention systems: goal-directed and stimulus-driven attention.”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Corbetta & Shulman, 2002 source

In the paper

“The multiple demand system comprises a network of prefrontal and parietal regions, which is activated by a diverse range of challenging cognitive tasks.”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Duncan, 2010 source

In the paper

“These AB indices may reflect differing degrees of influence of bottom-up and top-down mechanisms involved in threat evaluation, spatial orienting and inhibitory processing.”

In the paper

“studies of self-reported attention control in healthy young adults suggest that poor cognitive flexibility relates more closely to depression than anxiety symptoms”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Olafsson et al., 2011 source
• Not checked yetcites Reinholdt-Dunne, Mogg, & Bradley, 2013

In the paper

“Guided by their review of cognitive neuroscience research findings, Petersen and Posner (2012) updated their 1990 attention model and identified five networks: an alerting network, two orienting networks and two executive control networks.”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Petersen & Posner, 2012 source

In the paper

“Although findings are mixed, other research suggests that anxiety impairs cognitive flexibility (e.g., indexed by task-switching) and working memory functions, which may be modulated by task demands or presence of threat (Berggren & Derakshan, 2013;Snyder et al., 2015;Stout et al., 2013;2015).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Berggren & Derakshan, 2013 source
• Not checked yetcites Snyder et al., 2015 source
• ?Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  cites Stout et al., 2013;2015

In the paper

“Another influential view was Posner and Petersen's (1990) model which described three main attention systems: (i) Alerting, which maintains a vigilant alert state and facilitates rapid responses to external stimuli, (ii) Orienting to sensory events, and (iii) Detecting signals for conscious focal processing.”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Posner & Petersen, 1990 source

In the paper

“Nevertheless, models of attention and cognitive control share key ideas about several core functions (Fig. 3b) which have been integrated into the framework outlined in Fig. 4.”

In the paper

“They proposed that representations of objects compete for processing resources in multiple points of the visual processing system, including bottom-up stimulus-driven mechanisms which, for example, respond to moving, bright or novel stimuli; and higher-level top-down control mechanisms which select objects for visual processing according to their relevance to current behaviour.”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Desimone & Duncan, 1995 source

In the paper

“The preceding overview indicates that there is no clear consensus regarding the organisation of attention and executive control functions (Section 3; Fig. 3a).”

In the paper

“The top-down cognitive-control system supports goal-directed thought and action, and biases bottom-up processes in favour of information relevant to current tasks and concerns (Corbetta & Shulman, 2002; Desimone & Duncan, 1995;Duncan, 2010;Miyake & Friedman, 2012;Miyake et al., 2000).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Corbetta & Shulman, 2002 source
• Not checked yetcites Desimone & Duncan, 1995 source
• Not checked yetcites Duncan, 2010 source

In the paper

“Furthermore, Sylvester et al. (2012) propose that both high trait anxiety and anxiety disorders are associated with individual differences in dysfunction in four brain networks: ventral attention, frontoparietal, cingulo-opercular and default mode network; which results in increased bottom-up stimulus-driven attention, reduced topdown attention control, increased error sensitivity, and poor”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Sylvester et al., 2012 source

In the paper

“One recent influential view is load theory (Lavie, 2005(Lavie, , 2010)), which proposes that attention selection operates at each level of processing (which is capacity-limited) and depends on task demands at each level.”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Lavie, 2005 source
• Not checked yetcites Lavie, 2010 source

In the paper

“For example, individual differences in executive attention control are related to variables such as education experience and dopamine genes; and individual differences in alerting have been linked with function of the noradrenaline neurotransmitter system (Petersen & Posner, 2012;Posner & Fan, 2008;Posner & Rothbart, 2005).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Petersen & Posner, 2012 source
• Not checked yetcites Posner & Fan, 2008
• Not checked yetcites Posner & Rothbart, 2005

In the paper

“Diamond (2013) broadens Miyake et al.'s (2000) model and, based on a review of empirical evidence, describes three core executive functions.”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Diamond, 2013 source

In the paper

“For example, a recent meta-analysis indicates that clinical depression is associated with impairment across multiple executive functions, including inhibitory control, shifting, and updating working memory (Snyder, 2013).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Snyder, 2013 source

In the paper

“Sylvester et al. (2012) propose that anxiety-related dysfunction in each of the four networks should be evident on tasks using neutral stimuli (i.e., it is not specific to processing threat information).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Sylvester et al., 2012 source

In the paper

“A different view of executive control emerged from latent variable analyses of behavioural data from complex executive function tests, which indicated three separable functions (Friedman & Miyake, 2004;Miyake et al., 2000).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Friedman & Miyake, 2004 source
• Not checked yetcites Miyake et al., 2000 source

In the paper

“For example, training individuals to ignore non-emotional task-irrelevant stimuli may enhance frontoparietal network function and attention control, and thereby help reduce anxiety.”

In the paper

“A limitation of these latent variable analyses is that findings were based on a restricted sample of tests of complex executive functions, which did not include visuospatial attention tasks.”

In the paper

“While anxiety may be correlated with a wide variety of perturbations in threat processing (see Fig. 4 for examples), not all are implicated in its onset and maintenance.”

In the paper

“Thus, the present framework encompasses the view that bottom-up stimulus-salience evaluation processes play an important role in contributing to anxiety, and that evaluation of the motivational importance of a stimulus, which includes its threat value, can occur outside awareness and depends on automatic integration of information from multiple sources (Pessoa & Adolphs, 2010).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Pessoa & Adolphs, 2010 source

In the paper

“These functions are interrelated and contribute to a unitary construct of cognitive control (Duncan, 2010;Miyake & Friedman, 2012;Miyake et al., 2000).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Duncan, 2010 source
• Not checked yetcites Miyake & Friedman, 2012 source
• Not checked yetcites Miyake et al., 2000 source

In the paper

“Inhibitory control is a shared feature of top-down processes and may be subsumed under a common cognitive control factor (Miyake & Friedman, 2012).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Miyake & Friedman, 2012 source

In the paper

“The same may apply to other functions, such as cognitive flexibility, or bottom-up spatial orienting (Eysenck et al., 2007;Sylvester et al., 2012).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Eysenck et al., 2007 source
• Not checked yetcites Sylvester et al., 2012 source

In the paper

“This fear circuit is involved in evaluation and detection of threat cues, eliciting and regulating emotional responses, and fear learning and extinction (LeDoux, 2012).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites LeDoux, 2012 source

In the paper

“Nevertheless, top-down orienting is included in the framework as it relates to two different types of AB in anxiety: maintenance of attention on threat, and threat avoidance (Cisler & Koster, 2010), and is not the same as goal-directed inhibitory control.”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Cisler & Koster, 2010 source

In the paper

“Anxiety disorders are characterised by heightened amygdala response to threat cues, and dysfunctional connectivity between the amygdala and prefrontal cortical regions which support cognitive control and emotion regulation.”

In the paper

“They conclude from their review of neuroscience research that cortical regions are involved in both conscious and nonconscious processing of emotional information; and these multiple parallel sources of information are automatically integrated in subcortical regions, such as the amygdala and pulvinar.”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Pessoa & Adolphs, 2010 source

In the paper

“Previous models of anxiety suggest that anxiety vulnerability and its maintenance, and ABs to threat, may stem from dysfunction in one or more cognitive functions, including automatic evaluation of the threat value of stimuli; automatic and strategic attention orienting to threat; and other cognitive control processes supported by top-down inhibitory control, which oppose bottom-up processing of”

In the paper

“From a neuroscience perspective, one dominant view is that subcortical brain regions are responsible for nonconscious evaluation of stimulus threat value.These include the amygdala and pulvinar, which are widely regarded as primitive brain structures in evolutionary terms.”

In the paper

“A more recent view, put forward by Pessoa and Adolphs (2010), is that the primary role of the amygdala is to coordinate and modulate functioning of cortical networks during the evaluation of the biological or motivational significance of stimuli.”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Pessoa and Adolphs (2010) source

In the paper

“The amygdala is involved not only in automatic processing of threat-related information, but also in processing emotionally salient information more generally (Sergerie, Chochol, & Armony, 2008).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Sergerie, Chochol, & Armony, 2008 source

In the paper

“Another top-down process is strategic reason-based appraisal, which corresponds to secondary appraisal (or reappraisal) in Beck and Clark (1997), and guided threat evaluation in Bar-Haim et al. (2007).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Beck and Clark (1997) source
• Not checked yetcites Bar-Haim et al. (2007) source

In the paper

“The key role of this stimulus-salience evaluation mechanism is not only to identify whether an unattended stimulus has high motivational salience for the individual, but also to modulate processing in other bottom-up and top-down systems in favour of prioritising motivationally important stimuli.”

In the paper

“For example, amygdala response to emotional stimuli is reduced by both attention control (focusing on a primary task rather than emotional distractors) and reappraisal (reinterpreting the meaning of emotional stimuli), which are supported by a common neural network in frontoparietal regions shared by cognitive control processes (Kanske et al., 2010).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Kanske et al., 2010 source

In the paper

“Anxiety-proneness and anxiety disorders may reflect malfunction in more than one operation of this mechanism, including (i) exaggerated automatic evaluation of the threat value of stimuli, (ii) excessive outputs to other bottom-up and top-down processes, and (iii) inadequate modulation of its activity by inputs from top-down cognitive-control processes.”

In the paper

“Of these functions, goal-directed inhibitory control may be particularly important in opposing processing of task-irrelevant threat information (Eysenck et al., 2007), as well as contributing to topdown cognitive control functions in general (Miyake & Friedman, 2012).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Eysenck et al., 2007 source
• Not checked yetcites Miyake & Friedman, 2012 source

In the paper

“While AB in initial attention orienting towards threat may not be the primary cause of anxiety; this and other ABs may contribute to it, as noted by previous models of anxiety.”

In the paper

“These ABs in orienting towards and away from threat complement AB in threat-distractor interference, which also reflects imbalance between bottom-up and top-down systems, and may also contribute to anxiety (e.g., difficulty in suppressing AB in threat-distractor interference, due to enhanced bottom-up interrupt and insufficient task-related cognitive control, may increase intrusive negative”

In the paper

“These tasks typically use relatively long stimulus-exposure durations for threat cues (e.g., 500 ms or more) which allows influences of both automatic and strategic orienting.”

In the paper

“Another view is that anxious individuals show increased automatic initial orienting to minor threats because the stimuli have been evaluated as having disproportionately high threat value, due to a bias in automatic threat-evaluation processes (Mogg & Bradley, 1998).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Mogg & Bradley, 1998 source

In the paper

“For example, repeatedly ignoring minor threat cues may strengthen top-down inhibitory control processes which oppose the influence of the bottom-up stimulussalience evaluation system, which prioritises threat processing and biases bottom-up and top-down orienting (Fig. 4).”

In the paper

“Consequently, it may exert a dominating modulatory influence over bottom-up and top-down processes, with resultant difficulty in sustaining adaptive goal-directed thought and action in the presence of minor threat cues.”

In the paper

“However, this research does not clarify whether this bias is a correlate or cause of anxiety.”

In the paper

“The weak effect of ABM-threat-avoidance training on reducing anxiety could be explained by this ABM method being insufficiently effective in modifying the mechanisms responsible for both AB and anxiety.”

In the paper

“Poor goal-directed inhibitory control may not only be an important mechanism contributing to ABs in anxiety, but it may also play a key role in intrusive negative thinking including rumination and worry (Kircanski, Johnson, Mateen, Bjork, & Gotlib, 2015).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Kircanski, Johnson, Mateen, Bjork, & Gotlib, 2015

In the paper

“Disengagement difficulty has also been defined as an AB component reflecting increased dwelling on threat, which may facilitate its more elaborative processing (Fox et al., 2001).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Fox et al., 2001 source

In the paper

“As these trial conditions differ in presence versus absence of task-irrelevant threat, slower RTs on threatincongruent (relative to neutral-neutral) trials may reflect greater maintenance of spatial attention on threat, poor top-down threatdistractor inhibition, and/or enhanced bottom-up interrupt by threat which may slow RT.”

In the paper

“For example, on emotional spatial-cueing tasks, slower RTs on invalid-threat versus invalid-nonthreat cue trials may reflect maintained spatial attention on the location of threat to facilitate its identification (Fox et al., 2001), poor attention control (Cisler & Koster, 2010;Eysenck et al., 2007), and/or automatic interruption of task performance triggered by threat which does not involve”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Fox et al., 2001 source
• Not checked yetcites Cisler & Koster, 2010 source
• Not checked yetcites Eysenck et al., 2007 source

In the paper

“It is helpful to distinguish between bottom-up (automatic) and top-down sources of inhibition (Aron et al., 2014), which together influence the extent to which taskirrelevant threat cues influence task performance.”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Aron et al., 2014 source

In the paper

“While a key feature of this framework is the widely-used construct of inhibitory control (Diamond, 2013;Miyake & Friedman, 2012), its role in various aspects of processing such as attention and memory requires further clarification (Aron, Robbins, & Poldrack, 2014).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Aron, Robbins, & Poldrack, 2014 source

In the paper

“Specific mechanisms, which may influence RT-based measures of AB on spatial attention tasks, include bottom-up threat-salience evaluation (which biases other processes including orienting), automatic interruption (inhibition) of ongoing activity, alerting, automatic orienting to threat, strategic orienting towards or away from threat, goal-directed inhibitory control (which opposes the biasing”

In the paper

“The interrupt function contributes to a slowing effect of threat on task performance, while alerting contributes to a speeding effect of threat on RT.”

In the paper

“while faster RTs on invalid-threat versus invalid-nonthreat cue trials may reflect a spatial attention bias away from threat suggesting avoidance (Yiend et al., 2015) and/or bottom-up alerting triggered by threat which speeds RT.”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Yiend et al., 2015 source

In the paper

“While automatic orienting and interrupt functions may relate to a common circuitbreaker mechanism (Corbetta & Shulman, 2002), they are also separable, as threat cues may automatically interrupt performance on tasks independent of spatial orienting (e.g., modified Stroop task using masked and unmasked threat stimuli; Algom et al., 2004).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Corbetta & Shulman, 2002 source
• Not checked yetcites Algom et al., 2004 source

In the paper

“It also refers to capture of attention by threat and difficulty redirecting attention to a new stimulus, related to poor attention control mediated by the prefrontal cortex (Cisler & Koster, 2010).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Cisler & Koster, 2010 source

In the paper

“Another advantage is that recent models of attention no longer uphold the distinction between separate shifting, engagement and disengagement components of orienting (Posner & Fan, 2008) and distinguish between bottom-up and topdown influences on orienting (Corbetta & Shulman, 2002;Petersen & Posner, 2012).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Posner & Fan, 2008
• Not checked yetcites Corbetta & Shulman, 2002 source
• Not checked yetcites Petersen & Posner, 2012 source

In the paper

“As noted earlier (Section 2.13), ABs observed on spatial attention tasks include initial orienting towards threat, maintaining attention on threat, and avoidance of threat.”

In the paper

“Interventions which strengthen goal-directed inhibitory control, such as training individuals to ignore neutral task-irrelevant information on a flanker task, may be effective in reducing intrusive negative thinking and mood (Cohen, Mor, & Henik, 2014) and in suppressing neural activity such as amygdala function associated with bottom-up threat bias on processing (Cohen et al., 2015).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Cohen, Mor, & Henik, 2014
• Not checked yetcites Cohen et al., 2015

In the paper

“According to Posner and Petersen's (1990) influential spotlight model of attention, disengagement refers to one specific component of visual orienting, distinct from shifting and engagement, with its own neural substrate (parietal cortex).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Posner and Petersen's (1990) source

In the paper

“In an extensive review of empirical evidence of ABs in anxiety, Van Bockstaele et al. (2014) concluded that, when recent studies were taken into account, the strength of the relationship between AB and anxiety seems less consistent than suggested by an earlier meta-analysis (Bar-Haim et al., 2007).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Van Bockstaele et al. (2014) source
• Not checked yetcites Bar-Haim et al., 2007 source

In the paper

“The AB index of threat-distractor interference is more commonly inferred from tasks that do not involve spatial orienting (e.g., modified Stroop task).”

In the paper

“Thus, the conventional index of AB assessed at short stimulus durations (within 500 ms of stimulus onset) is widely held to reflect a bias in initial orienting of spatial attention to threat (MacLeod et al., 1986;Williams et al., 1988Williams et al., , 1997)).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites MacLeod et al., 1986 source
• Not checked yetcites Williams et al., 1988
• Not checked yetcites Williams et al., 1997

In the paper

“On the visual-search task, slower RTs to detect nonthreat targets amongst threat distractors (relative to nonthreat targets amongst nonthreat distractors) may also reflect multiple processes.These may include initial orienting to threat distractors and maintaining attention on them (due to bias from the bottom-up threat-salience evaluation mechanism on automatic and strategic orienting), automatic”

In the paper

“To recap, this framework proposes that anxiety stems from imbalance between bottom-up and top-down systems involved in threat evaluation, attention and cognitive control (Fig. 4).”

In the paper

“Regarding effects of ABM-positive-search training on AB, most studies found changes in AB measures for threat and positive stimuli, although these changes varied across studies.”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Dandeneau et al., 2007 source
• Not checked yetcites De Voogd et al., 2014 source
• Not checked yetcites Waters et al., 2013 source

In the paper

“However, anxiety may not be caused by dysfunction in an isolated process”

In the paper

“The use of positive targets may make training more enjoyable and engaging, which may help treatment compliance (Rapee et al., 2013).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Rapee et al., 2013 source

In the paper

“Their preliminary results suggest that single-session A-FACT reduces ABs (towards and away from threat)”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Zvielli et al., 2015 source

In the paper

“However, the anxiolytic effect of ABM-positive-search training may not necessarily depend on using highly positive targets, given that it also includes calm targets which have relatively mild positive valence (e.g., book, armchair).”

In the paper

“methods which are designed to promote goal-directed inhibitory control over threat distractor processing, without avoidant orienting, may be effective in reducing anxiety and attenuating ABs in orienting to threat”

In the paper

“Also, it may be easier and more adaptive to strengthen positive/nonthreat goal priorities (i.e., to attend to positive, calming and task-relevant information) than to strengthen goal priorities which specify what to avoid.”

In the paper

“and AB to threat in a nonclinical sample”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Notebaert et al., 2015 source

In the paper

“However, the choice of goal-relevant stimuli may be another important parameter of ABM tasks.”

In the paper

“ABM-threat-avoidance training is based on the premise that anxious individuals have an enhanced AB towards threat, and interventions which reduce this AB should reduce anxiety.”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites MacLeod & Clarke, 2015

In the paper

“Fifth, these methods may differ in suitability for anxious individuals; as ABM-threatavoidance training may be inappropriate for anxious individuals who do not show pre-existing AB in orienting towards threat (Eldar et al., 2012;Van Bockstaele et al., 2014), whereas ABM-positivesearch training seems potentially suitable for all anxious individuals, irrespective of whether they show AB in orienting”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Eldar et al., 2012 source
• Not checked yetcites Van Bockstaele et al., 2014 source

In the paper

“This questions the premise of ABM-threat-avoidance training that anxious individuals are strongly characterised by AB in orienting to threat (indexed by the visual-probe task), and its reduction is necessary for anxiety reduction.”

In the paper

“These showed reduction in anxiety symptoms from pre-to post-training, irrespective of the type of training task, and without reducing AB to threat on spatial-attention tasks.”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Boettcher et al., 2013 source
• Not checked yetcites Heeren et al., 2015
• Not checked yetcites McNally et al., 2013 source

In the paper

“Fourth, the term, ABM-threat-avoidancetraining does not accurately reflect the operationalisation of ABM-positive-search-training, which instructs participants to prioritise attention-search goals for positive (e.g., good/calm) information, rather than threat avoidance.”

In the paper

“One study unexpectedly found that training attention towards threat reduced social anxiety more than a control training condition; which may have been due to the attend-threat training condition enhancing exposure to threat cues (Boettcher et al., 2013).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Boettcher et al., 2013 source

In the paper

“For example, training an individual to repeatedly direct attention to the less negative alternative of two items could subsequently bias responses on selfreport measures of anxiety towards less negative response choices, resulting in lower anxiety scores.”

In the paper

“Thus, attention training methods (including ABM-threat-avoidance training) may have an anxiolytic effect, mediated by improved cognitive control, which does not depend on reducing AB in orienting to threat.”

In the paper

“Third, these ABM methods may differ in effects on goal-directed top-down cognitive control functions (see Section 5.4).”

In the paper

“ABMthreat-avoidance training assumes that the anxiolytic effect of ABM training depends on reducing AB to threat, as indexed by AB in orienting towards threat”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites MacLeod & Clarke, 2015

In the paper

“(i) AB to threat is not a unitary construct: its manifestations include ABs in orienting towards and away from threat (i.e., initial orienting to threat, maintained attention on threat, threat avoidance) and AB in threat-distractor interference.”

In the paper

“Its components correspond to core cognitive functions identified by models of attention, cognitive control and stimulus-salience evaluation.”

In the paper

“While most ABM studies assess AB in orienting (e.g., visual-probe task), some assess threat-distractor interference (e.g., modified Stroop task), or use AB measures which may reflect both (e.g., spatial-cueing, visual-search tasks; see Section 4.4.1).”

In the paper

“some of which may contribute to findings of stronger ABM effects in laboratory than home settings”

In the paper

“However, inclusion of highly positive targets may enhance its efficacy (e.g., by improving positive mood, engagement with training, and generalisation across diverse stimuli).”

In the paper

“Individual differences in ABs are not specific to threat cues in anxiety, as they are also found for other motivationally or personally salient information, for example, in illness and pain (Hou et al., 2014;Todd et al., 2015); as well as for rewards, such as food cues in obesity (Castellanos et al., 2009) and drug cues in addiction (Field & Cox, 2008;Field, Mogg, & Bradley, 2006).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Hou et al., 2014 source
• Not checked yetcites Todd et al., 2015 source
• Not checked yetcites Castellanos et al., 2009 source

In the paper

“As IBM may encourage a response strategy to select less negative answers on self-report measures of anxiety”

In the paper

“Anxiety and ABs to threat are consequences of imbalance in these systems.”

In the paper

“The cognitive control system exerts goal-directed influences on orienting, which may maintain attention on threat (threat monitoring goal), suppress AB in orienting to threat or elicit AB away from threat (e.g., reflecting task-focused or distress-reduction goals).”

In the paper

“(viii) The anxiolytic effect of ABM-positive-search training may not depend on using highly positive target stimuli, as it also uses calm nonthreat targets which have relatively mild positive valence.”

In the paper

“For example, strengthening threat-distractor inhibition, without involving spatial orienting, may be beneficial.”

In the paper

“Both bottom-up and top-down processes may contribute to this bias, which has been targeted by computer-delivered interpretation bias modification (IBM) training (Lau, 2013;MacLeod & Mathews, 2012).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Lau, 2013 source
• Not checked yetcites MacLeod & Mathews, 2012

In the paper

“The present framework has potential relevance for such work, given that exaggerated ABs may reflect imbalance between bottom-up automatic processing of stimuli which have high motivational salience for the individual (aversive or reward-related) and top-down cognitive control processes, in a variety of health-related and psychological disorders.”

In the paper

“The proposed framework (summarised in Fig. 4) builds on and integrates proposals from previous cognitive models of anxiety (Fig. 2), and models of attention and cognitive control (Fig. 3).”

In the paper

“as some findings suggest that ABM and control attention training may reduce anxiety, without reducing AB in orienting to threat, perhaps by improving cognitive control (e.g., Badura-Brack et al. 2015;Heeren, Mogoas ¸e, McNally et al., 2015;Boettcher et al., 2013;McNally et al., 2013).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Badura-Brack et al., 2015 source
• Not checked yetcites Heeren et al., 2015
• Not checked yetcites Boettcher et al., 2013 source

In the paper

“(ix) ABM training which enhances top-down cognitive control, including threat-distractor inhibition, may reduce anxiety symptoms of anxious individuals, irrespective of whether they show pre-existing AB in orienting towards threat, away from threat, or unstable AB.”

In the paper

“Cognitive models of anxiety, reviewed earlier, not only predict increased attention to threat in anxiety but also a bias in interpretative processes; which is supported by empirical evidence of an increased tendency for anxious individuals to interpret ambiguous information in a negative or threat-related manner (see Mathews & MacLeod, 2005; for a review).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Mathews & MacLeod, 2005 source

In the paper

“(iv) Anxious individuals do not consistently show AB in orienting towards threat (e.g., on the visual-probe task), and may show threat vigilance, threat avoidance, or unstable AB (rapidly fluctuating between vigilance and avoidance).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Bar-Haim et al., 2007 source