Skip to main content
Top
Gepubliceerd in: Cognitive Therapy and Research 4/2019

02-01-2019 | Original Article

Does Modification of Implicit Associations Regarding Contamination Affect Approach Behavior and Attentional Bias?

Auteurs: Christina Dusend, Laura M. S. De Putter, Ernst H. W. Koster, Fanny A. Dietel, Ulrike Buhlmann

Gepubliceerd in: Cognitive Therapy and Research | Uitgave 4/2019

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail

Abstract

Individuals with contamination concerns show aberrant interpretational and attentional processes. Yet, it is unclear whether threat-related associations play a causal role in anxiety symptoms and attentional bias. The objective of our study was to investigate if training implicit associations affects stress reactivity and attention in the context of contamination concerns. In a double-blind randomized design, we used a modified Implicit Associations Task (IAT) to train associations between contamination and danger in a non-clinical sample (N = 121). Dependent measures were a brief-IAT to assess changes in associations, contamination-related behavior approach tasks, and a spatial cueing task to measure attentional bias. Results show that training successfully modified implicit associations. However, there were no transfer effects on approach behavior or attention. Findings suggest that the modified IAT is a useful task for training implicit associations, but that transfer to other domains (attention and behavior) is limited. Limitations and future implications are discussed.
Bijlagen
Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers
Voetnoten
1
We assessed current depressive symptoms and suicidal ideation again upon arrival prior to study conduction. Participants were excluded prior to the study when they had a sum score of more than 19 or a score of more than 1 on the item no 9 in the BDI-II (N = 0).
 
2
In the following we will describe the blocks using the notation contamination/dangerous and contamination/not dangerous. This includes the blocks with reversed positions of same categories.
 
3
Words of the cleanliness set were used as neutral words for the spatial cueing task. To keep consistent with other studies, we refer to them as neutral words (since they are not related to danger or specific concerns) for the spatial cueing task.
 
4
The spatial cueing task contained 192 trials. Due to an error in programming, general threatening words were presented only on the left side of the screen. We did not use them for analyses to avoid bias of presentation location.
 
5
We provide further analyses in the Supplementary Material confirming our conclusion that increase in stress reactivity occurred in response to the BATs and is not related to other aspects of the experiment. Please find a time-course of adverse emotionality ratings assessed over visual analogue scales in the Supplementary Material.
 
6
We also conducted the same analyses with only both of the active training groups (NT vs. PT), since analyses of the B-IAT suggested significant differences only between those two. Results showed the same pattern, and there were no further significant results supporting hypothesis testing.
 
Literatuur
go back to reference Amir, N., Elias, J., Klumpp, H., & Przeworski, A. (2003). Attentional bias to threat in social phobia: Facilitated processing of threat or difficulty disengaging attention from threat? Behaviour Research and Therapy, 41(11), 1325–1335.CrossRef Amir, N., Elias, J., Klumpp, H., & Przeworski, A. (2003). Attentional bias to threat in social phobia: Facilitated processing of threat or difficulty disengaging attention from threat? Behaviour Research and Therapy, 41(11), 1325–1335.CrossRef
go back to reference Beck, A. T., & Clark, D. A. (1997). An information processing model of anxiety: Automatic and strategic processes. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 35(1), 49–58.CrossRef Beck, A. T., & Clark, D. A. (1997). An information processing model of anxiety: Automatic and strategic processes. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 35(1), 49–58.CrossRef
go back to reference Beck, A. T., Steer, R. A., & Brown, G. K. (1996). BDI-II, Beck depression inventory: Manual (2nd edn.). San Antonio: Psychological Corp.; Harcourt Brace. Beck, A. T., Steer, R. A., & Brown, G. K. (1996). BDI-II, Beck depression inventory: Manual (2nd edn.). San Antonio: Psychological Corp.; Harcourt Brace.
go back to reference Buchner, A., Erdfelder, E., Faul, F., & Lang, A.-G. (2011). G*Power (Version 3.1.3). Kiel. Buchner, A., Erdfelder, E., Faul, F., & Lang, A.-G. (2011). G*Power (Version 3.1.3). Kiel.
go back to reference Davis, M. L., Rosenfield, D., Bernstein, A., Zvielli, A., Reinecke, A., Beevers, C. G., et al. (2016). Attention bias dynamics and symptom severity during and following CBT for social anxiety disorder. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 84(9), 795–802. https://doi.org/10.1037/ccp0000125.CrossRefPubMed Davis, M. L., Rosenfield, D., Bernstein, A., Zvielli, A., Reinecke, A., Beevers, C. G., et al. (2016). Attention bias dynamics and symptom severity during and following CBT for social anxiety disorder. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 84(9), 795–802. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1037/​ccp0000125.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Dusend, C., De Putter, L. M. S., Koster, E. H. W., Möllmann, A., & Buhlmann, U. (2018). Inducing attentional bias in individuals with elevated contamination concerns: Effects on information processing and approach behavior (Manuscript in preparation). Dusend, C., De Putter, L. M. S., Koster, E. H. W., Möllmann, A., & Buhlmann, U. (2018). Inducing attentional bias in individuals with elevated contamination concerns: Effects on information processing and approach behavior (Manuscript in preparation).
go back to reference Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E., & Schwartz, J. L. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(6), 1464–1480.CrossRef Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E., & Schwartz, J. L. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(6), 1464–1480.CrossRef
go back to reference Greenwald, A. G., Nosek, B. A., & Banaji, M. R. (2003). Understanding and using the implicit association test: I. An improved scoring algorithm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(2), 197–216.CrossRef Greenwald, A. G., Nosek, B. A., & Banaji, M. R. (2003). Understanding and using the implicit association test: I. An improved scoring algorithm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(2), 197–216.CrossRef
go back to reference Hautzinger, M., Keller, F., & Kühner, C. (2006). Beck Depressionsinventar: BDI II. Revision. Frankfurt/Main: Harcourt Test Services. Hautzinger, M., Keller, F., & Kühner, C. (2006). Beck Depressionsinventar: BDI II. Revision. Frankfurt/Main: Harcourt Test Services.
go back to reference Park, J. W., Yoon, S. O., Kim, K. H., & Wyer, R. S. (2001). Effects of priming a bipolar attribute concept on dimension versus concept-specific accessibility of semantic memory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(3), 405–420.CrossRef Park, J. W., Yoon, S. O., Kim, K. H., & Wyer, R. S. (2001). Effects of priming a bipolar attribute concept on dimension versus concept-specific accessibility of semantic memory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(3), 405–420.CrossRef
go back to reference Spielberger, C. D., Gorsuch, R. L., Lushene, R., Vagg, P. R., & Jacobs, G. A. (1977). State-trait anxiety inventory for adults. Redwood City: Mindgarden Inc. Spielberger, C. D., Gorsuch, R. L., Lushene, R., Vagg, P. R., & Jacobs, G. A. (1977). State-trait anxiety inventory for adults. Redwood City: Mindgarden Inc.
Metagegevens
Titel
Does Modification of Implicit Associations Regarding Contamination Affect Approach Behavior and Attentional Bias?
Auteurs
Christina Dusend
Laura M. S. De Putter
Ernst H. W. Koster
Fanny A. Dietel
Ulrike Buhlmann
Publicatiedatum
02-01-2019
Uitgeverij
Springer US
Gepubliceerd in
Cognitive Therapy and Research / Uitgave 4/2019
Print ISSN: 0147-5916
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2819
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-018-09991-6

Andere artikelen Uitgave 4/2019

Cognitive Therapy and Research 4/2019 Naar de uitgave