Cited by 49Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsCOVID-19 and Mental Health

Cognitive Biases in Pathological Health Anxiety: The Contribution of Attention, Memory, and Evaluation Processes

Witthöft, Michael, Kerstner, Tobias, Ofer, Julia, Mier, Daniela, Rist, Fred, Diener, Carsten, Bailer, Josef·2016·Clinical Psychological Science

Abstract

Pathological health anxiety refers to the medically unfounded fear of suffering from a severe illness. Differences in cognitive processes related to attention, memory, and evaluation of health threat have been hypothesized to underlie pathological health anxiety. In no study, however, have researchers systematically and simultaneously assessed different cognitive biases. On the basis of the idea that multiple cognitive biases simultaneously contribute to psychopathology (the combined-cognitive-bias hypothesis), we compared 88 patients with pathological health anxiety, 52 patients with depressive disorder, and 52 healthy participants on their performance in several cognitive tasks involving health-threatening content. Individuals with pathological health anxiety showed a stronger attentional bias to health-threat-related information, more negative explicit (but not implicit) evaluations of health threat, and biased response behavior in light of health threat. The results suggest that stronger bindings between feelings of arousal and health-threatening information in working memory might be crucial for the higher salience of health-threatening contents in pathological health anxiety.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/2167702615593474

Cites

79 of 79 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?

  • Illness-related bias occurs in highly health-anxious individuals and patients with pathological HA, and describes the tendency to focus on information that confirms health worries and to ignore contradictory information.

    “It was found to occur in highly health-anxious individuals [97,98], as well as in patients with pathological HA [99-101] and describes the tendency to focus on information that confirms their health worries and to ignore information that is contradictory [58].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Witthöft, M., Kerstner, T., Ofer, J., Mier, D., Rist, F., Diener, C., & Bailer, J.
Affiliations
  • Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz (DE)
  • Heidelberg University (DE)
  • University of Münster (DE)
  • SRH University of Applied Sciences Heidelberg (DE)
Corresponding author
Witthöft, Michael
Venue
Clinical Psychological Science
Published
2015-08-11
Volume
4
Issue
3
Pages
464-479
ISSN
  • 2167-7026 (ISSN-L)
  • 2167-7034
OpenAlex
W2257800394
Cited by
49
References
79
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2
FWCI
6.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Clinical Psychological Science (publishedVersion)
  • KOPS (University of Konstanz) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, BA 1597/5, BA 1597/5-1,2)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › COVID-19 and Mental Health
Keywords
cognitive biases, attentional bias, working memory, arousal, depressive 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.

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