The DOI matches its Crossref record; 37 of the 37 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Attentional bias for threat: Evidence for delayed disengagement from emotional faces
Open accessAbstract
The present paper reports three new experiments suggesting that the valence of a face cue can influence attentional effects in a cueing paradigm. Moreover, heightened trait anxiety resulted in increased attentional dwell-time on emotional facial stimuli, relative to neutral faces. Experiment 1 presented a cueing task, in which the cue was either an "angry", "happy", or "neutral" facial expression. Targets could appear either in the same location as the face (valid trials) or in a different location to the face (invalid trials). Participants did not show significant variations across the different cue types (angry, happy, neutral) in responding to a target on valid trials. However, the valence of the face did affect response times on invalid trials. Specifically, participants took longer to respond to a target when the face cue was "angry" or "happy" relative to neutral. In Experiment 2, the cue-target stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) was increased and an overall inhibition of return (IOR) effect was found (i.e., slower responses on valid trials). However, the "angry" face cue eliminated the IOR effect for both high and low trait anxious groups. In Experiment 3, threat-related and jumbled facial stimuli reduced the magnitude of IOR for high, but not for low, trait-anxious participants.These results suggest that: (i) attentional bias in anxiety may reflect a difficulty in disengaging from threat-related and emotional stimuli, and (ii) threat-related and ambiguous cues can influence the magnitude of the IOR effect.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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 cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“A number of studies have since supported this hypothesis (Amir, Elias, Klumpp, & Przeworski, 2003; Fox, Russo, & Dutton, 2002; Georgiou et al., 2005).”
From Attentional bias and emotional reactivity as predictors and moderators of behavioral treatment for social phobia (2013) · cites this paper as Fox, Russo, & Dutton, 2002
In the citing paper
“We know from previous literature that pessimists have a stronger attentional bias toward negative stimuli42 and, in a similar way, high anxiety leads to be attentive to negative events43444546.”
From Changes in perception of treatment efficacy are associated to the magnitude of the nocebo effect and to personality traits (2016) · cites this paper as [43]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
(1970) · Cited by 24,983
Posner, M. I. (1980) · Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1080/00335558008248231 · Cited by 9,670
(1996) · Cited by 3,692
Components of visual orienting
Posner, M. I. (1984) · Attention and performance · Cited by 2,980
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
Gazzaniga, M. S., & Bizzi, E. (2000) · Cited by 2,547
Inhibitory Processes in Attention, Memory and Language
Carr, T. H., & Dagenbach, D. (1994) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 2,276
Cognitive Psychology and Emotional Disorders
Williams, J. M. G. (1988) · UWA Profiles and Research Repository (UWA) · Cited by 1,871
Automatic vigilance: The attention-grabbing power of negative social information.
Pratto, F., & John, O. P. (1991) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.61.3.380 · Cited by 1,592
Do threatening stimuli draw or hold visual attention in subclinical anxiety?
Fox, E., Russo, R., Bowles, R., & Dutton, K. (2001) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: General · doi:10.1037/0096-3445.130.4.681 · Cited by 1,469
Self-citation
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Fox E., Cognitive, affective and behavioral Neuroscience
- 10.1037/0021-843X.102.1.121 · DOI
- Posner M. I., 1984, Attention and performance X, 531
- 10.1080/02724980042000462 · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Anxiety and cognitive performance: Attentional control theory
Eysenck, M. W., Derakshan, N., Santos, R., & Calvo, M. G. (2007) · Emotion · doi:10.1037/1528-3542.7.2.336 · Cited by 5,289
Threat-related attentional bias in anxious and nonanxious individuals: a meta-analytic study.
Bar-Haim, Y., Lamy, D., Pergamin, L., Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., & van IJzendoorn, M. H. (2007) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.133.1.1 · Cited by 3,721
Cognitive vulnerability to emotional disorders
Mathews, A., & MacLeod, C. (2005) · Annual Review of Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.clinpsy.1.102803.143916 · Cited by 2,100
Mechanisms of attentional biases towards threat in anxiety disorders: An integrative review
Cisler, J. M., & Koster, E. H. W. (2010) · Clinical Psychology Review · doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2009.11.003 · Cited by 1,753
Gaze cueing of attention: visual attention, social cognition, and individual differences
Frischen, A., Bayliss, A. P., & Tipper, S. P. (2007) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.133.4.694 · Cited by 1,473
Metadata
- Authors
- Fox, E., Russo, R., & Dutton, K.
- Affiliations
- University of Essex (GB)
- Venue
- Cognition & Emotion
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2002-05
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 355-379
- ISSN
- 0269-9931 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-0600
- PMC
- PMC2241753
- OpenAlex
- W2028816106
- Cited by
- 954
- References
- 37
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 30 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 38 · 2020: 34 · 2019: 53 · 2018: 46 · 2017: 44 · 2016: 40 · 2015: 64 · 2014: 61 · 2013: 62 · 2012: 56
- FWCI
- 8.04
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Cognition & Emotion (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Open Access at Essex (University of Essex) (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- Wellcome Trust (045800, 45800)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Keywords
- attentional bias, threats, emotional facial expressions, trait anxiety, attentional disengagement, inhibition of return, ambiguous cues
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
