The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year; 123 of the 123 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 47 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Cognitive Bias Modification: Past Perspectives, Current Findings, and Future Applications
Open accessAbstract
Research conducted within the general paradigm of cognitive bias modification (CBM) reveals that emotional biases in attention, interpretation, and memory are not merely associated with emotional disorders but contribute to them. After briefly describing research on both emotional biases and their modification, the authors examine similarities between CBM paradigms and older experimental paradigms used in research on learning and memory. The techniques and goals of CBM research are compared with other approaches to understanding cognition–emotion interactions. From a functional perspective, the CBM tradition reminds us to use experimental tools to evaluate assumptions about clinical phenomena and, more generally, about causal relationships between cognitive processing and emotion.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
Cognitive bias modification (CBM) research shows that emotional biases in attention, interpretation, and memory can be experimentally modified, and that these changes can alter later emotional reactivity. The review links CBM to older learning/memory paradigms and argues that CBM is a general experimental tool for testing causal cognition-emotion assumptions.
Key findings
- Attention training can shift attentional bias and emotional vulnerability: participants trained to attend threat reported more distress after insoluble problems than those trained to avoid threat, while repeated benign attention training reduced rated work stress and lowered cortisol in telemarketers.
- Interpretation training can change how novel ambiguity is resolved and can affect emotion: negative training increased anxiety and negative interpretations, whereas positive training reduced worry, social anxiety, and depressed mood; effects persisted to the next day and influenced distress while viewing accident videos.
- Memory modification is less developed: only a few experiments have established biased memories, and five memory-modification experiments failed to find or did not assess emotional consequences; one study found benign training proactively interfered with controlled recollection of negative resolutions.
- CBM is framed as related to transfer-appropriate processing, desirable difficulties, and associative learning; far-transfer effects to emotional challenges are central but are not always obtained.
Methods
- Design: narrative review of experiments within the CBM tradition, comparing CBM paradigms with older learning and memory paradigms such as counterconditioning and transfer-appropriate processing.
- Data or sample: reviewed experiments were conducted with nonclinical volunteers unless participants were selected for special characteristics such as emotional vulnerability or clinical condition.
- Main analysis: qualitative synthesis of attention, interpretation, and memory modification studies, plus discussion of mechanisms, automaticity versus cognitive control, mood-cognition research, appraisal theory, and cognitive behavior therapy.
Limitations
- The paper states that only a few experiments have been performed to establish biased memories, that five memory-modification experiments failed to find or did not assess emotional consequences, that far transfer is not always obtained, and that it is too soon to know the extent and manner of controlled versus automatic processes in CBM.
- The paper also notes that self-reports about cognitive procedures are usually not reliable and that there has been little neuroimaging research on cognitive control in bias modification.
- Evident from the text: as a narrative review, it does not report a systematic search strategy or quantitative synthesis.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
37 Not checked yet · 27 Own interpretation · 3 No basis given
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Relative to nonanxious control groups, anxious individuals are more likely to remember and report ambiguous events in terms of their more threatening meanings.”
§ Cognitive Bias Modification: Past Perspectives, Current Findings, and Future Applications > Interpretation bias
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Eysenck, Mogg, May, Richards, & Mathews, 1991
- Not checked yetcites Hirsch & Mathews, 2000
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Eight sessions of positive training led to greater decreases on a questionnaire assessing social anxiety than in the control group.”
§ Cognitive Bias Modification: Past Perspectives, Current Findings, and Future Applications > Interpretation training
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Beard & Amir, 2008
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“However, as is the case with depression, evidence for memory biases in anxiety is found when other cognitive characteristics of anxiety are taken into account (such as imagery-based distortions in the recall of social scenarios; Hertel, Brozovich, Joormann, & Gotlib, 2008; see Hirsch, Clark, & Mathews, 2006).”
§ Cognitive Bias Modification: Past Perspectives, Current Findings, and Future Applications > Memory bias
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hertel, Brozovich, Joormann, & Gotlib, 2008
- Not checked yetcites Hirsch, Clark, & Mathews, 2006
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In one version, participants were trained to make positive interpretations with or without self-imagery, and only the imagery-based training was effective in protecting against negative mood (Holmes, Lang, & Shah, 2009; see also Blackwell & Holmes, 2010).”
§ Cognitive Bias Modification: Past Perspectives, Current Findings, and Future Applications > Interpretation training
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Holmes, Lang, & Shah, 2009
- Not checked yetcites Blackwell & Holmes, 2010
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Attention training has also been shown to have beneficial effects for participants suffering from clinical anxiety states, such as Generalized Anxiety Disorder and social phobia (for a meta-analysis, see Hakamata et al., 2010).”
§ Cognitive Bias Modification: Past Perspectives, Current Findings, and Future Applications > Attention training
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hakamata et al., 2010
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“In a related clinical study, similar training reduced worry in patients suffering from Generalized Anxiety Disorder (Hayes, Hirsch, Krebs, & Mathews, 2010).”
§ Cognitive Bias Modification: Past Perspectives, Current Findings, and Future Applications > Interpretation training
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hayes, Hirsch, Krebs, & Mathews, 2010
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Adapted versions of interpretation training have also been found to ameliorate or prevent depressed mood.”
§ Cognitive Bias Modification: Past Perspectives, Current Findings, and Future Applications > Interpretation training
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Holmes, Lang, & Shah, 2009
- Not checked yetcites Watkins, Baeyens, & Read, 2009
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“compared with a more abstract, ruminative condition, a new concrete and experiential training condition effectively reduced depressed mood (Watkins, Baeyens, & Read, 2009).”
§ Cognitive Bias Modification: Past Perspectives, Current Findings, and Future Applications > Interpretation training
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Watkins, Baeyens, & Read, 2009
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The same is true of practice in interpreting ambiguous events in a relatively benign manner.”
§ Cognitive Bias Modification: Past Perspectives, Current Findings, and Future Applications > Attention training
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“In participants complaining of excessive worry, a single session of practice in selecting the benign meaning of emotionally ambiguous words and descriptions reduced later negative thought intrusions, in contrast to control participants who accessed benign and threatening meanings equally often (Hirsch, Hayes, & Mathews, 2009).”
§ Cognitive Bias Modification: Past Perspectives, Current Findings, and Future Applications > Interpretation training
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hirsch, Hayes, & Mathews, 2009
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 19
- Probably not a substantial claim. 2
In the paper
“those who are prone to anxiety or depression are more likely than others to interpret ambiguity in a negative way, attend more to emotionally negative cues, and selectively recall negative information (Mathews & MacLeod, 2005).”
§ Cognitive Bias Modification: Past Perspectives, Current Findings, and Future Applications > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Mathews & MacLeod, 2005
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Overall, emotional stimuli tend to capture attention more than do neutral ones, but whereas this tendency in healthy individuals applies as much (and sometimes more) to positive as to negative cues, in those prone to anxiety or depression, attention is more likely to be captured by negative cues, particularly when such cues are related to individual emotional concerns.”
§ Cognitive Bias Modification: Past Perspectives, Current Findings, and Future Applications > Attentional bias
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“There is also evidence (albeit somewhat less consistent) that depression is associated with negative interpretations of emotional ambiguity.”
§ Cognitive Bias Modification: Past Perspectives, Current Findings, and Future Applications > Interpretation bias
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Lawson & MacLeod, 1999
- Not checked yetcites Lawson, MacLeod, & Hammond, 2002
- Not checked yetcites Mogg, Bradbury, & Bradley, 2006
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Compared with the positive group, participants allocated to practicing negative resolutions reported feeling more anxious and made more negative interpretations of the novel test descriptions (Mathews & Mackintosh, 2000).”
§ Cognitive Bias Modification: Past Perspectives, Current Findings, and Future Applications > Interpretation training
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Mathews & Mackintosh, 2000
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In contrast to a control condition in which participants searched for flowers, repeated sessions of training not only reduced rated work stress in telemarketers but also led to lower cortisol levels, an index of emotional distress.”
§ Cognitive Bias Modification: Past Perspectives, Current Findings, and Future Applications > Attention training
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Dandeneau, Baldwin, Baccus, Sakellaropoulo, and Pruessner (2007)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The key finding was that nonanxious controls were more likely to endorse nonthreatening interpretations, whereas currently anxious individuals were equally likely to endorse threatening and nonthreatening interpretations.”
§ Cognitive Bias Modification: Past Perspectives, Current Findings, and Future Applications > Interpretation bias
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Eysenck et al., 1991
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Whereas nondepressed individuals are more likely to remember positive self-descriptive words and happy faces, those prone to depression are relatively more likely to remember negative selfdescriptive words and sad faces.”
§ Cognitive Bias Modification: Past Perspectives, Current Findings, and Future Applications > Memory bias
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Mathews & MacLeod, 2005
- Not checked yetcites Matt et al., 1992
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“CBM experiments have demonstrated that cognitive biases can indeed be modified and that the induced changes influence subsequent emotional reactivity.”
§ Cognitive Bias Modification: Past Perspectives, Current Findings, and Future Applications > Abstract
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In summary, as with attention, practice in interpreting emotional ambiguity in a more positive (or negative) manner influences how novel ambiguous exemplars are interpreted and can also reduce (or increase) negative emotional states or the distress caused by stressful events.”
§ Cognitive Bias Modification: Past Perspectives, Current Findings, and Future Applications > Interpretation training
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“anxious individuals are typically faster to respond to targets appearing in locations just vacated by threatening rather than neutral cues, whereas nonanxious control participants show the reverse pattern (MacLeod, Mathews, & Tata, 1986; meta-analysis by Bar-Haim, Lamy, Pergamin, Bakermans-Kranenburg, & van IJzendoorn, 2007).”
§ Cognitive Bias Modification: Past Perspectives, Current Findings, and Future Applications > Attentional bias
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites MacLeod, Mathews, & Tata, 1986
- Not checked yetcites Bar-Haim et al., 2007
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Compared with the benign or positive processing style that characterizes healthy people, those prone to anxiety and depression are more likely to attend to negative or threatening cues, resolve ambiguity in negative ways, and selectively remember negative events.”
§ Cognitive Bias Modification: Past Perspectives, Current Findings, and Future Applications > In summary
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Both involve direct attempts to modify cognitive processes believed to underlie emotional distress, and both employ systematic exposure to the events that trigger distress.”
§ Cognitive Bias Modification: Past Perspectives, Current Findings, and Future Applications > Relation to Cognitive Behavior Therapy
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: In CBT, exposure to evocative events is designed to reduce emotional reactions via extinction or to collect evidence against false beliefs by showing that anticipated catastrophic consequences do not occur.
- Rests on an assumption: CBT also targets inappropriate cognitive content, but here the usual means of change is to directly challenge the reportable thoughts believed to maintain distress.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The evidence discussed so far strongly suggests that cognitive biases are malleable and that modifying them can have consequences for memory and emotional vulnerability.”
§ Cognitive Bias Modification: Past Perspectives, Current Findings, and Future Applications > In summary
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Beyond strictly clinical concerns, research paradigms gathered together under the rubric of cognitive bias modification are nothing more and nothing less than tools to test assumptions, often initially unspecified, about interactions between cognitive and emotional processes.”
§ Cognitive Bias Modification: Past Perspectives, Current Findings, and Future Applications > Conclusion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As with modification of attention to threat, practice in the positive resolution of ambiguity can transfer to new ambiguous situations and lead to subsequent changes in affective reactivity to potentially emotional novel events.”
§ Cognitive Bias Modification: Past Perspectives, Current Findings, and Future Applications > In summary
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In contrast, CBM involves repeated trials that target processes typically not available to conscious report, and as we have argued earlier, participants are not necessarily aware of the resultant changes.”
§ Cognitive Bias Modification: Past Perspectives, Current Findings, and Future Applications > Relation to Cognitive Behavior Therapy
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Both involve direct attempts to modify cognitive processes believed to underlie emotional distress, and both employ systematic exposure to the events that trigger distress.”
§ Cognitive Bias Modification: Past Perspectives, Current Findings, and Future Applications > Relation to Cognitive Behavior Therapy
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: In CBT, exposure to evocative events is designed to reduce emotional reactions via extinction or to collect evidence against false beliefs by showing that anticipated catastrophic consequences do not occur.
In the paper
“Lapse and relapse, in which the original contingencies dominate to guide behavior, tend to occur if features of the context revert to earlier conditions (the renewal effect) or if the original significant outcomes occur noncontingently (reinstatement).”
§ Cognitive Bias Modification: Past Perspectives, Current Findings, and Future Applications > Associative learning
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Bouton, 2000
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Unsurprisingly, the modification of cognitive biases relies on tried and true principles of experimental psychology.”
§ Cognitive Bias Modification: Past Perspectives, Current Findings, and Future Applications > Basic Mechanisms Underlying CBM
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Compared with other types of CBM, however, only a few experiments have been performed to establish biased memories, and these experiments mainly have modified interpretation biases in ways that produce distorted memories.”
§ Cognitive Bias Modification: Past Perspectives, Current Findings, and Future Applications > Procedures for changing memory
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Depressed participants achieved such forgetting but only when thought substitutes had been used to aid suppression practice (unlike controls who could forget without these aids).”
§ Cognitive Bias Modification: Past Perspectives, Current Findings, and Future Applications > Procedures for changing memory
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Joormann, Hertel, LeMoult, & Gotlib, 2009
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The authors state this as an assumption.
Cognitive characteristics play a part in creating emotional resilience or emotional vulnerability.
“A fundamental assumption underlying cognitive therapy for emotional disorders and cognitive appraisal theories of emotion is that cognitive characteristics play a part in creating emotional resilience or emotional vulnerability.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The same fundamental principles underlying CBM are likely to apply across a wide range of specific applications.
“Until we learn otherwise, we assume that the same fundamental principles are likely to apply across a wide range of specific applications.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The same cognitive procedures are involved in stressful transfer tasks as in training, despite differing contexts.
“the same cognitive procedures are assumed to be involved but the contexts differ substantially from those presented during training.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Students forget learned material after tests, and anxious or depressed individuals revert to well-practiced biases outside therapy.
“Unfortunately, students often forget what they have learned in college classes once the test has been taken, and anxious or depressed individuals easily revert to well-practiced biases outside the therapeutic context.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Self-reports about cognitive procedures are usually not reliable.
“self-reports about cognitive procedures are usually not reliable.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The lateral frontal cortex is implicated in intentional control.
“Because the lateral frontal cortex is implicated in intentional control, this finding might argue against exclusively automatic effects.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Appraisal theories have generally been tested by showing that the self-reported relevance of an event is a good predictor of emotional response, and not by modifying processes assumed to contribute to appraisal but likely inaccessible to conscious report.
“Appraisal theories have generally been tested by showing that the self-reported relevance of an event is a good predictor of emotional response and not by modifying processes assumed to contribute to appraisal but likely inaccessible to conscious report, as in CBM experiments.”
The paper relies on this without support.
In CBT, exposure to evocative events is designed to reduce emotional reactions via extinction or to collect evidence against false beliefs by showing that anticipated catastrophic consequences do not occur.
“In CBT, exposure to evocative events is designed to reduce emotional reactions via extinction (sometimes referred to as habituation) or to collect evidence against false beliefs by showing that anticipated catastrophic consequences do not occur.”
The paper relies on this without support.
In CBM, training and control conditions sometimes involve a similar extent of exposure to potential threat cues.
“In CBM, by contrast, extinction due to exposure is not thought to be the agent of change; in fact, training and control conditions sometimes involve a similar extent of exposure to potential threat cues.”
The paper relies on this without support.
CBT also targets inappropriate cognitive content, but here the usual means of change is to directly challenge the reportable thoughts believed to maintain distress.
“To be sure, CBT also targets inappropriate cognitive content, but here the usual means of change is to directly challenge the reportable thoughts believed to maintain distress.”
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
“In addition, ABM threat-avoidance training studies often use similar tasks to both modify AB and assess AB change (e.g., probe-based spatial attention tasks are used in both ABM threatavoidance training and AB assessment), and it is therefore unclear whether effects of training transfer to other AB measures or related cognitive functions [7,82].”
From Anxiety and Threat-Related Attention: Cognitive-Motivational Framework and Treatment (2018) · cites this paper as [82]
In the citing paper
“In addition, ABM threat-avoidance training studies often use similar tasks to both modify AB and assess AB change (e.g., probe-based spatial attention tasks are used in both ABM threatavoidance training and AB assessment), and it is therefore unclear whether effects of training transfer to other AB measures or related cognitive functions [7,82].”
From Anxiety and Threat-Related Attention: Cognitive-Motivational Framework and Treatment (2018) · cites this paper as [82]
Citations
Cites
(1975) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 7,245
Emotional processing of fear: Exposure to corrective information.
Foa, E. B., & Kozak, M. J. (1986) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.99.1.20 · Cited by 5,396
Nolen-Hoeksema, S., Wisco, B. E., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2008) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1745-6924.2008.00088.x · Cited by 5,172
Bower, G. H. (1981) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.36.2.129 · Cited by 4,154
A process dissociation framework: Separating automatic from intentional uses of memory
Jacoby, L. L. (1991) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1016/0749-596x(91)90025-f · Cited by 3,817
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
Attentional bias in emotional disorders
MacLeod, C., Mathews, A., & Tata, P. (1986) · Journal of Abnormal Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-843x.95.1.15 · Cited by 3,152
Self-citationHandbook of Cognition and Emotion
Dalgleish, T., & Power, M. (1999) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/0470013494 · Cited by 2,935
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
Self-citationThe emotional Stroop task and psychopathology
Williams, J. M. G., Mathews, A., & MacLeod, C. (1996) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.120.1.3 · Cited by 2,420
Self-citation
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- Anderson M.C., True and false recovered memories: Toward a reconciliation of the debate. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 58
- 10.1016/j.jbttep.2010.12.006 · DOI
- McDaniel M.A., 2010, Cognitive psychology of memory, 819
- Peters K.D., Journal of Abnormal Psychology
- Smith C.A., 1992, Emotion and social behaviour, 32
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Reflecting on rumination: Consequences, causes, mechanisms and treatment of rumination
Watkins, E. R., & Roberts, H. (2020) · Behaviour Research and Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.brat.2020.103573 · Cited by 862
Depression: A cognitive perspective
LeMoult, J., & Gotlib, I. H. (2019) · Clinical Psychology Review · doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2018.06.008 · Cited by 792
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
“Hence, there has been considerable interest in recently developed techniques that have proven capable of directly modifying low-level cognitive biases implicated in such models of anxiety pathology (cf. Bar-Haim 2010, Hakamata et al. 2010, Hallion & Ruskio 2011, Hertel & Mathews 2011, Mathews 2011).”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationWiers, R. W., Gladwin, T. E., Hofmann, W., Salemink, E., & Ridderinkhof, K. R. (2013) · Clinical Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/2167702612466547 · Cited by 486
Positive and Negative Emotion Regulation in Adolescence: Links to Anxiety and Depression
Young, K., Sandman, C., & Craske, M. (2019) · Brain Sciences · doi:10.3390/brainsci9040076 · Cited by 485
Metadata
- Authors
- Hertel, P. T., & Mathews, A.
- Affiliations
- Trinity University (US)
- University of California, Davis (US)
- Corresponding author
- Hertel, Paula T.
- ORCID
- Hertel, Paula T.
- Venue
- Perspectives on Psychological Science
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2011-10-14
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 521-536
- ISSN
- 1745-6916 (ISSN-L)
- 1745-6924
- OpenAlex
- W1995460541
- Cited by
- 321
- References
- 120
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 29 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 34 · 2015: 34 · 2014: 25 · 2013: 31 · 2012: 15
- FWCI
- 29.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Locations
- Perspectives on Psychological Science (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 › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychological Treatments and Assessments
- Keywords
- cognitive bias modification, emotional bias, attentional bias, interpretation bias, memory bias, emotion and cognition, emotional disorders
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-09, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-09 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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
