Cited by 478Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesFace Recognition and PerceptionNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Biases in eye movements to threatening facial expressions in generalized anxiety disorder and depressive disorder

Mogg, Karin, Millar, Neil, Bradley, Brendan P.·2000·Journal of Abnormal Psychology

Abstract

The study investigated biases in selective attention to emotional face stimuli in generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) and depressive disorder, using a modified probe detection task. There were 4 face types: threatening, sad, happy, and neutral. Measures of attentional bias included (a) the direction and latency of the initial eye movement in response to the faces and (b) manual reaction time (RT) to probes replacing the face stimuli 1,000 ms after their onset. Results showed that individuals with GAD (without depressive disorder) were more likely to look first toward threat faces rather than neutral faces compared with normal controls and those with depressive disorder. They also shifted their gaze more quickly toward threat faces, rather than away from them, relative to the other two groups. There were no significant findings from the manual RT data. Implications of the results for recent theories of clinical anxiety and depression are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0021-843x.109.4.695

Cites

76 of 76 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?

  • The average latency of initial fixations on threat in anxious individuals ranged from roughly 225 to 400 ms.

    “The average latency of initial fixations on threat in anxious individuals ranged from roughly 225 to 400 ms (Armstrong et al., 2010; Garner et al., 2006; Mogg et al., 2000).”
  • In free viewing tasks, EMs to threatening stimuli were not completed until roughly 225 ms to 400 ms after stimulus onset.

    “In free viewing tasks, EMs to threatening stimuli were not completed until roughly 225 ms to 400 ms after stimulus onset (Armstrong et al., 2010; Garner et al., 2006; Mogg et al., 2000), suggesting that increased maintenance of visual attention on threat could occur prior to one’s initial fixation on threat.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mogg, K., Millar, N., & Bradley, B. P.
Affiliations
University of Cambridge (GB)
Venue
Journal of Abnormal Psychology
Published
2000-11
Volume
109
Issue
4
Pages
695-704
ISSN
  • 0021-843X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1846
OpenAlex
W2061967562
Cited by
478
References
65
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 29 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 26 · 2016: 31 · 2015: 33 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 22 · 2012: 26
FWCI
4.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Abnormal Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
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
generalized anxiety disorder, depressive disorders, attentional bias, eye movements, gaze direction, emotional face processing, threat detection
MeSH terms
Adult, Anxiety Disorders, Attention, Depressive Disorder, Emotions, Eye Movements, Facial Expression, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Reaction Time

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