Recollection is impaired by the modification of interpretation bias.
Abstract
The interpretation paradigm of cognitive-bias modification (CBM-I) was modified with instructions used in process-dissociation procedures for the purpose of investigating processes contributing to performance on the transfer task. In Experiment 1, nonanxious students were trained to interpret ambiguous situations in either a negative or benign way (or they read nonambiguous scenarios). They were then asked to respond to new ambiguous situations, in the same way as contextually similar analogues during training, or to respond differently. Benign training proactively impaired memory for negative outcomes. This effect was replicated by anxious students in Experiment 2 and discussed with respect to the assumptions underlying process-dissociation procedures and directions for future research.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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?
Watching stressful videos, trying to solve an unsolvable anagram task under time pressure, or giving a speech should be stressful for most individuals.
“For example, watching stressful videos [39], trying to solve an unsolvable anagram task under time pressure ‘knowing’ that ‘most people have no problems solving it in time’, e.g., see [9] or giving a speech, e.g. see [55] should be stressful for most individuals.”
From How to boost positive interpretations? A Meta-Analysis of the effectiveness of cognitive bias modification for interpretation (2014) · cites this paper as [39]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 18 · Cited by 22
- Authors
- Hertel, P. T., Vasquez, E., Benbow, A., & Hughes, M.
- Affiliations
- Trinity University (US)
- ORCID
- Hertel, Paula T.
- Venue
- Journal of Abnormal Psychology
- Published
- 2011-11
- Volume
- 120
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 902-910
- ISSN
- 0021-843X (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1846
- OpenAlex
- W2161264754
- Cited by
- 22
- References
- 18
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 4.12
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Abnormal Psychology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Digital Commons - Trinity University (Trinity University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychological Treatments and Assessments
- Keywords
- cognitive bias modification, interpretation bias, memory impairment, process dissociation, anxiety, ambiguous situations, transfer of training
- MeSH terms
- Affect, Analysis of Variance, Anxiety, Cognition, Female, Humans, Male, Models, Psychological, Psychological Tests, Mental Recall, Students, Transfer, Psychology, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy
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
