Cited by 43Posttraumatic Stress Disorder ResearchAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications

A critical review of negative affect and the application of CBT for PTSD

Brown, Wilson J., Dewey, Daniel, Bunnell, Brian E., Boyd, Stephen J., Wilkerson, Allison K., Mitchell, Melissa A., Bruce, Steven E.·2018·Trauma, Violence, & Abuse

Abstract

Forms of cognitive and behavioral therapies (CBTs), including prolonged exposure and cognitive processing therapy, have been empirically validated as efficacious treatments for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). However, the assumption that PTSD develops from dysregulated fear circuitry possesses limitations that detract from the potential efficacy of CBT approaches. An analysis of these limitations may provide insight into improvements to the CBT approach to PTSD, beginning with an examination of negative affect as an essential component to the conceptualization of PTSD and a barrier to the implementation of CBT for PTSD. As such, the literature regarding the impact of negative affect on aspects of cognition (i.e., attention, processing, memory, and emotion regulation) necessary for the successful application of CBT was systematically reviewed. Several literature databases were explored (e.g., PsychINFO and PubMed), resulting in 25 articles that met criteria for inclusion. Results of the review indicated that high negative affect generally disrupts cognitive processes, resulting in a narrowed focus on stimuli of a negative valence, increased rumination of negative autobiographical memories, inflexible preservation of initial information, difficulty considering counterfactuals, reliance on emotional reasoning, and misinterpretation of neutral or ambiguous events as negative, among others. With the aim to improve treatment efficacy of CBT for PTSD, suggestions to incorporate negative affect into research and clinical contexts are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1524838016650188

Cites

165 of 165 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Brown, W. J., Dewey, D., Bunnell, B. E., Boyd, S. J., Wilkerson, A. K., Mitchell, M. A., & Bruce, S. E.
Affiliations
  • Summa Health System (US)
  • Medical University of South Carolina (US)
  • VA Portland Health Care System (US)
  • University of Missouri–St. Louis (US)
Corresponding author
Brown, Wilson J.
Venue
Trauma, Violence, & Abuse
Published
2016-06-14
Volume
19
Issue
2
Pages
176-194
ISSN
  • 1524-8380 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-8324
OpenAlex
W2437141769
Cited by
43
References
159
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1
FWCI
3.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Trauma Violence & Abuse (publishedVersion, public-domain)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Keywords
negative affect, post-traumatic stress disorder, cognitive behavioral therapy, prolonged exposure, cognitive processing therapy, fear circuitry, rumination, autobiographical memory, emotion regulation, attention, counterfactual reasoning, emotional reasoning, treatment efficacy
MeSH terms
Fear, Female, Humans, Irritable Mood, Male, Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Treatment Outcome

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