Cited by 336Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development

Affect-biased attention as emotion regulation

Open access
Todd, Rebecca M., Cunningham, William A., Anderson, Adam K., Thompson, Evan·2012·Trends in Cognitive Sciences

Abstract

The affective biasing of attention is not typically considered to be a form of emotion regulation. In this article, we argue that 'affect-biased attention' - the predisposition to attend to certain categories of affectively salient stimuli over others - provides an important component of emotion regulation. Affect-biased attention regulates subsequent emotional responses by tuning one's filters for initial attention and subsequent processing. By reviewing parallel research in the fields of emotion regulation and affect-biased attention, as well as clinical and developmental research on individual differences in attentional biases, we provide convergent evidence that habitual affective filtering processes, tuned and re-tuned over development and situation, modulate emotional responses to the world. Moreover, they do so in a manner that is proactive rather than reactive.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.tics.2012.06.003

Cites

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?

  • Attention underlies much of our executive function and regulatory processes, guiding different motivated behaviors.

    “Attention underlies much of our executive function and regulatory processes (e.g., James, 1890/1992; Kaplan & Berman, 2010;Todd, Cunningham, Anderson, & Thompson, 2012), guiding different motivated behaviors.”

    From The Psychology of Rituals: An Integrative Review and Process-Based Framework (2018) · cites this paper as Todd, Cunningham, Anderson, & Thompson, 2012

  • This attunement may occur via the brain's coding of social-contextual cues.

    “This attunement may occur via the brain's coding of social-contextual cues (e.g., Todd et al., 2012), a process not explicitly articulated in existing neurobiological susceptibility models.”

    From Adolescent neurobiological susceptibility to social context (2016) · cites this paper as Todd et al., 2012

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 75 · Cited by 336

Authors
Todd, R. M., Cunningham, W. A., Anderson, A. K., & Thompson, E.
Affiliations
University of Toronto (CA)
Venue
Trends in Cognitive Sciences
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-07
Volume
16
Issue
7
Pages
365-372
ISSN
1364-6613 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2081821057
Cited by
336
References
75
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 28 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 27 · 2019: 26 · 2018: 25 · 2017: 35 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 28 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 3
FWCI
1.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Trends in Cognitive Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion, public-domain)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Keywords
emotion regulation, attentional bias, affective salience, individual differences, developmental changes, emotional responses
MeSH terms
Affect, Amygdala, Attention, Brain Mapping, Emotions, Humans, Individuality, Models, Neurological

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