The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 29 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The causal role of interpretive bias in anxiety reactivity
Abstract
Elevated anxiety vulnerability is associated with a tendency to interpret ambiguous stimuli as threatening, but the causal basis of this relationship has not been established. Recently, procedures have been developed to systematically manipulate interpretive bias, but the impact of such manipulation on anxiety reactivity to a subsequent stressor has not yet been examined. In the present study, training procedures were used to induce interpretive biases favoring the threatening or nonthreatening meanings of ambiguous information in a sample of 48 undergraduate students. Following this interpretive training, participants' emotional reactions to a stressful video were assessed. The finding that the manipulation of interpretive bias modified emotional reactivity supports the hypothesis that interpretive bias can indeed play a causal role in anxiety vulnerability.
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
“Furthermore, contrary to predictions that the tendency to benignly interpret ambiguous situations should decrease the negative mood response particularly under conditions of emotional provocation [63], we did not find this in the present data.”
From How to boost positive interpretations? A Meta-Analysis of the effectiveness of cognitive bias modification for interpretation (2014) · cites this paper as [63]
Citations
Cites
Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales.
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063 · Cited by 32,433
(1970) · Cited by 24,983
Tripartite model of anxiety and depression: psychometric evidence and taxonomic implications
Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (1991) · Journal of Abnormal Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-843x.100.3.316 · Cited by 4,601
A cognitive model of social phobia
Adrian Wells, A. (1995) · Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) · Cited by 2,701
Clark, D. M. (1986) · Behaviour Research and Therapy · doi:10.1016/0005-7967(86)90011-2 · Cited by 2,422
Emotion elicitation using films
Gross, J. J., & Levenson, R. W. (1995) · Cognition & Emotion · doi:10.1080/02699939508408966 · Cited by 2,179
Cognitive Psychology and Emotional Disorders
Williams, J. M. G. (1988) · UWA Profiles and Research Repository (UWA) · Cited by 1,871
An information processing model of anxiety: Automatic and strategic processes
Beck, A. T., & Clark, D. A. (1997) · Behaviour Research and Therapy · doi:10.1016/s0005-7967(96)00069-1 · Cited by 1,317
Social Phobia: Diagnosis, Assessment, and Treatment
Amada, G. (1996) · American Journal of Psychotherapy · doi:10.1176/appi.psychotherapy.1996.50.3.373 · Cited by 1,248
Cognitive Psychology and Emotional Disorders
Wilhelm, S. A. (1998) · Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry · Cited by 1,101
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Beck, 1996, Beck Depression Inventory Manual
- 10.1080/0269993004200141 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Cognition and Depression: Current Status and Future Directions
Gotlib, I. H., & Joormann, J. (2010) · Annual Review of Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.clinpsy.121208.131305 · Cited by 2,420
“Clearly, further studies are needed that carefully and systematically investigate interpretive biases in depression.”
BackgroundA 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
Examining emotion regulation in depression: A review and future directions
Joormann, J., & Stanton, C. H. (2016) · Behaviour Research and Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.brat.2016.07.007 · Cited by 749
Blanchette, I., & Richards, A. (2009) · Cognition & Emotion · doi:10.1080/02699930903132496 · Cited by 742
“Training methods have typically used emotional homographs (Grey & Mathews, 2000 ; Hertel, Mathews, Peterson, & Kintner, 2003 ; Wilson, MacLeod, Mathews, & Rutherford, 2006 ) or ambiguous text (Mathews & Mackintosh, 2000 ).”
Cognitive Bias Modification Approaches to Anxiety
MacLeod, C., & Mathews, A. (2012) · Annual Review of Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032511-143052 · Cited by 664
“However, even when alternative CBM training conditions do not directly influence mood state, they still elicit differential selective interpretation and attention (Hoppit et al. 2010, Wilson et al. 2006).”
BackgroundInfluential
Metadata
- Authors
- Wilson, E. J., MacLeod, C., Mathews, A., & Rutherford, E. M.
- Affiliations
- The University of Western Australia (AU)
- MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit (GB)
- ORCID
- MacLeod, Colin
- Venue
- Journal of Abnormal Psychology
- Published
- 2006-02
- Volume
- 115
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 103-111
- ISSN
- 0021-843X (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1846
- OpenAlex
- W2043978415
- Cited by
- 262
- References
- 29
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 24
- FWCI
- 20.52
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Abnormal Psychology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- UWA Profiles and Research Repository (UWA) (submittedVersion)
- UEA Digital Repository (University of East Anglia) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychological Treatments and Assessments
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Keywords
- interpretation bias, threat interpretation, ambiguous stimuli, emotional reactivity, stress response, anxiety vulnerability, causal manipulation
- MeSH terms
- Anxiety Disorders, Cognition, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Humans, Teaching, Observer Variation, Bias
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
