Cited by 19Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesDental Anxiety and Anesthesia TechniquesPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments

Cognitive biases in blood-injection-injury phobia: a review

Open access
Abado, Elinor, Aue, Tatjana, Okon-Singer, Hadas·2021·Frontiers in Psychiatry

Abstract

Blood-injection-injury (BII) phobia can lead to avoidance of crucial medical procedures and to detrimental health consequences, even among health workers. Yet unlike other specific phobias, BII phobia has been understudied. Specifically, while cognitive biases have been extensively investigated in other anxiety disorders, little is known about the same biases in BII phobia. The current article reviews cognitive biases in BII phobia and suggest future directions for further study and treatment. The reviewed biases include attention, expectancy, memory, perception, and interpretation biases. The investigation of these biases is highly relevant, as cognitive biases have been found to interact with anxiety symptoms. Results showed that attention, expectancy, and memory biases are involved in BII phobia, while no studies were found on interpretation nor perception biases. Mixed results were found for attention bias, as different studies found different components of attention bias, while others found no attention bias at all. Similarly, some studies found a-priori/a-posteriori expectancy biases, while other studies found only one type of bias. A better understanding of the cognitive particularities of BII phobia may lead to better treatments and ultimately reduce avoidance of needles and blood-related situations, thereby enabling individuals with BII phobia to undergo potentially life-saving medical procedures.

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 · 10.3389/fpsyt.2021.678891

Cites

89 of 89 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?

  • In the case of BII, studies identified a distinct pathophysiological mechanism.

    “However, in the case of phobia relating to blood, injury, and injection (BII), studies identified a distinct pathophysiological mechanism (9, 21–28)”

    From Combined Fainting and Psychogenic Non-epileptic Seizures as Significant Therapy Hurdles in Blood-Injury-Injection Phobia: A Mini-Review and Case Report (2022) · cites this paper as [22]

    The Introduction (page unavailable) reports distinct neurobiological responses in BII phobia compared with spider phobia and says some studies suggest a cardiac response found only in BII. But it also says BII physiology is debated and the empirical basis for the proposed biphasic response has been criticized. The claim presents a distinct pathophysiological mechanism as more firmly established than the review does. (LLM, conf=0.81)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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
Abado, E., Aue, T., & Okon-Singer, H.
Affiliations
  • University of Haifa (IL)
  • University of Bern (CH)
Corresponding author
Abado, Elinor
Venue
Frontiers in Psychiatry
Published
2021-07-13
Volume
12
Pages
678891-678891
ISSN
1664-0640 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3182153185
Cited by
19
References
87
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3
FWCI
0.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Psychiatry (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Bern Open Repository and Information System (University of Bern) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Open Access CRIS of the University of Bern
Funders
Israel Science Foundation
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › Oral Surgery › Dental Anxiety and Anesthesia Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Keywords
blood-injection-injury phobia, cognitive biases, attentional bias, expectancy bias, memory bias, perceptual bias, interpretation bias, needle phobia, healthcare workers, anxiety 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