The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Bias in interpretation of ambiguous sentences related to threat in anxiety
Abstract
In the 1st of 2 experiments, currently clinically anxious, recovered clinically anxious, and normal control subjects were presented with a mixture of unambiguous and ambiguous sentences; both threatening and nonthreatening interpretations were possible for the latter. A subsequent recognition-memory test indicated that the currently anxious subjects were more likely than normal control and recovered anxious subjects to interpret the ambiguous sentences in a threatening fashion rather than in a nonthreatening fashion. This suggests that the biased interpretation of ambiguity found in currently anxious subjects reflected their anxious mood state. A 2nd experiment established that the difference in interpretative processes between currently anxious and control subjects was not due to response bias and that the interpretative bias was a reasonably general one.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
In the citing paper
“There is also good evidence that interpretative biases favouring threat also play an important role in a wide range of anxiety disorders”
From Short-term serotonergic but not noradrenergic antidepressant administration reduces attentional vigilance to threat in healthy volunteers (2009) · cites this paper as Eysenck et al., 1991
In the citing paper
“healthy individuals more likely draw positive than negative interpretations of ambiguous situations, whereas individuals with a current anxiety disorder are more likely to draw almost as many positive as negative interpretations [22].”
From How to boost positive interpretations? A Meta-Analysis of the effectiveness of cognitive bias modification for interpretation (2014) · cites this paper as [22]
In the citing paper
“healthy individuals more likely draw positive than negative interpretations of ambiguous situations, whereas individuals with a current anxiety disorder are more likely to draw almost as many positive as negative interpretations [22].”
From How to boost positive interpretations? A Meta-Analysis of the effectiveness of cognitive bias modification for interpretation (2014) · cites this paper as [22]
In the citing paper
“The protocol for reviewing the articles was developed by the first author based on the suggested strategy by Lipsey and Wilson [22] and adhered to the PRISMA guidelines (Table S1).”
From How to boost positive interpretations? A Meta-Analysis of the effectiveness of cognitive bias modification for interpretation (2014) · cites this paper as [22]
Citations
Cites
The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale
Zigmond, A. S., & Snaith, R. P. (1983) · Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica · doi:10.1111/j.1600-0447.1983.tb09716.x · Cited by 47,139
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 3rd ed
Cooper, A. M., & Michels, R. (1981) · American Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1176/ajp.138.1.128 · Cited by 7,419
Bower, G. H. (1981) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.36.2.129 · Cited by 4,154
Attentional bias in emotional disorders.
MacLeod, C., Mathews, A., & Tata, P. R. (1986) · Journal of Abnormal Psychology · doi:10.1037//0021-843x.95.1.15 · Cited by 2,553
Self-citationSelective processing of threat cues in anxiety states
Mathews, A., & MacLeod, C. (1985) · Behaviour Research and Therapy · doi:10.1016/0005-7967(85)90104-4 · Cited by 1,001
Self-citationA Primer of Signal Detection Theory
McNicol, D. (2005) · Psychology Press eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781410611949 · Cited by 856
Price, J. N. (1986) · Journal of Biosocial Science · doi:10.1017/s0021932000016369 · Cited by 715
Cognitive functioning and anxiety
Eysenck, M. W., MacLeod, C., & Mathews, A. (1987) · Psychological Research · doi:10.1007/bf00308686 · Cited by 378
Self-citationMemory bias in clinical anxiety
Mogg, K., Mathews, A., & Weinman, J. (1987) · Journal of Abnormal Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-843x.96.2.94 · Cited by 351
Self-citationImplicit and explicit memory bias in anxiety.
Mathews, A., Mogg, K., May, J., & Eysenck, M. W. (1989) · Journal of Abnormal Psychology · doi:10.1037//0021-843x.98.3.236 · Cited by 275
Self-citationInterpretation of homophones related to threat in anxiety states.
Mathews, A., Richards, A., & Eysenck, M. W. (1989) · Journal of Abnormal Psychology · doi:10.1037//0021-843x.98.1.31 · Cited by 275
Self-citationMemory : neurochemical and abnormal perspectives
Weinman, J. A., & Hunter, J. A. (1990) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 30
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A Meta-Analysis of Personality in Scientific and Artistic Creativity
Feist, G. J. (1998) · Personality and Social Psychology Review · doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr0204_5 · Cited by 2,180
A cognitive-motivational analysis of anxiety.
Mogg, K., & Bradley, B. P. (1998) · Behaviour Research and Therapy · doi:10.1016/s0005-7967(98)00063-1 · Cited by 1,642
Self-citationComorbidity of anxiety and unipolar mood disorders
Mineka, S., Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1998) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.49.1.377 · Cited by 1,573
A justification-suppression model of the expression and experience of prejudice.
Crandall, C. S., & Eshleman, A. K. (2003) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.129.3.414 · Cited by 1,168
A meta-analysis of the effect of cognitive bias modification on anxiety and depression
Hallion, L. S., & Ruscio, A. M. (2011) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0024355 · Cited by 891
Metadata
- Authors
- Eysenck, M. W., Mogg, K., May, J., Richards, A., & Mathews, A.
- Affiliations
- University of London (GB)
- Venue
- Journal of Abnormal Psychology
- Published
- 1991-05
- Volume
- 100
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 144-150
- ISSN
- 0021-843X (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1846
- OpenAlex
- W2055112615
- Cited by
- 516
- References
- 12
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 65 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 27 · 2015: 24 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 25 · 2012: 26
- FWCI
- 11.51
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Abnormal Psychology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Wellcome Trust
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health via Writing
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
- Keywords
- interpretation bias, ambiguous sentences, threat interpretation, anxiety, anxiety disorders, recognition memory, response bias, mood states, cognitive biases
- MeSH terms
- Anxiety Disorders, Color Perception, Female, Humans, Language Tests, Male, Memory, Personality Inventory, Psychological Tests, Reaction Time, Semantics
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
