Cited by 57Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesVisual Attention and Saliency Detection

The neural correlates of attentional bias in blood phobia as revealed by the N2pc

Open access
Buodo, Giulia, Sarlo, Michela, Munafò, Marianna·2010·Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience

Abstract

In the literature, a lack of attentional bias in blood phobia has been reported, using both behavioral and ERP measures. However, in the tasks employed so far, attentional resources to single stimuli, rather than attentional selection, were evaluated. The present study investigated whether in blood phobics disorder-relevant pictures can capture visuo-spatial attention when paired with neutral or non-specific unpleasant pictures (attack), and participants have to focus on a visual detection task. The N2pc component of the ERPs was measured as an index of spatial attentional selection. Results showed that in blood phobics, but not in controls, injuries elicited a larger early N2pc than attack pictures when paired with neutral material. Moreover, only in blood phobics a reliable N2pc to injury-attack pairs was found. The late N2pc reversal to injury pictures suggests that early orienting to phobic cues was followed by cognitive avoidance.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/scan/nsp050

Cites

55 of 55 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Buodo, G., Sarlo, M., & Munafò, M.
Affiliations
University of Padua (IT)
Venue
Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience
Published
2009-12-05
Volume
5
Issue
1
Pages
29-38
ISSN
  • 1749-5016 (ISSN-L)
  • 1749-5024
OpenAlex
W2101789092
Cited by
57
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 1 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 2
FWCI
3.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • CINECA IRIS Institutional Research information system (University of Urbino) (submittedVersion)
  • Padua Research Archive (University of Padova) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Padua Research Archive (University of Padova) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Visual Attention and Saliency Detection
Keywords
blood phobia, attentional bias, N2pc, spatial attention, orienting, cognitive avoidance, phobic stimuli, visual detection task, neural correlates
MeSH terms
Adult, Analysis of Variance, Attention, Blood, Brain Mapping, Cerebral Cortex, Cues, Electroencephalography, Evoked Potentials, Visual, Female, Humans, Phobic Disorders, Photic Stimulation, Surveys and Questionnaires, Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted, Visual Perception

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