Top

Gepubliceerd in:

21-10-2020 | Original Article

Which Variations of a Brief Cognitive Bias Modification Session for Interpretations Lead to the Strongest Effects?

Auteurs: Shari A. Steinman, Nauder Namaky, Sarah L. Toton, Emily E. E. Meissel, Austin T. St. John, Nha-Han Pham, Alexandra Werntz, Tara L. Valladares, Eugenia I. Gorlin, Sarai Arbus, Miranda Beltzer, Alexandra Soroka, Bethany A. Teachman

Gepubliceerd in: Cognitive Therapy and Research | Uitgave 2/2021

Abstract

Background

Brief computerized programs that train less threatening interpretations (termed Cognitive Bias Modification for Interpretations, or CBM-I) can shift interpretation biases and subsequent anxiety symptoms. However, results have been inconsistent, particularly for studies conducted over the Internet.

Methods

The current exploratory study tests 13 variations of a single brief session of CBM-I, a non-CBM-I cognitive flexibility condition, a neutral condition, and a no task control condition in an analogue sample with moderate to severe anxiety.

Results

Results suggest that all conditions, except the neutral scenarios condition and the alternative way to improve cognitive flexibility, led to changes in interpretations (when compared to the no task control condition). Only conditions geared toward increasing imagery during CBM-I and targeting flexibility related to emotional material differed from the no task control condition on other post-training measures.

Conclusions

Presenting valenced interpretations of ambiguous information during brief CBM-I, regardless of the format, can lead to changes in interpretation bias. However, most conditions did not differ from the no task control condition on other post-training assessments (and differences that did occur may be due to chance). Future trials should consider further testing of CBM-I that targets flexibility related to emotional material, and should include an increased number of sessions and trials.

vorige artikel Testing the Effectiveness of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy in Relieving Nurses’ Ageism Toward Older Adults: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers

Additional measures were included that are not discussed here, including assessments of imagery vividness and engagement with training scenarios. For more details, please contact the first author.

There were no differences in Cohen’s d comparing the analysis of all cases to complete cases for BBSIQ, positive RRT Change, or negative RRT Change. For ASSQ, the differences in Cohen’s d ranged from -0.05 to 0.13. For three conditions, 100% Positive, Imagery Only/Audio, and Implementation Intention, these small changes in effect size were enough to change the statistical significance of the finding, with the 95% confidence interval shifting from including zero to not including zero.

Thank you to an anonymous reviewer for suggesting this analysis.

Antony, M. M., Bieling, P. J., Cox, B. J., Enns, M. W., & Swinson, R. P. (1998). Psychometric properties of the 42-item and 21-item versions of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales in clinical groups and a community sample. Psychological Assessment, 10(2), 176–181. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.10.2.176CrossRef

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

Beltzer, M. L., Nock, M. K., Peters, B. J., & Jamieson, J. P. (2014). Rethinking butterflies: The affective, physiological, and performance effects of reappraising arousal during social evaluation. Emotion, 14(4), 761–768. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036326CrossRefPubMed

Blackwell, S. E., Woud, M. L., & MacLeod, C. (2017). A question of control? Examining the role of control conditions in experimental psychopathology using the example of cognitive bias modification research. Spanish Journal of Psychology, 20, E54. https://doi.org/10.1017/sjp.2017.41CrossRef

Blackwell, S. E., Woud, M. L., Margraf, J., & Schönbrodt, F. D. (2019). Introducing the leapfrog design: A simple Bayesian adaptive rolling trial design for accelerated treatment development and optimization. Clinical Psychological Science, 7(6), 1222–1243. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167702619858071CrossRef

Chandler, J., & Shapiro, D. (2016). Conducting clinical research using crowdsourced convenience samples. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 12, 53–81. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-021815-093623CrossRefPubMed

Clark, D. A., & Beck, A. T. (2010). Cognitive theory and therapy of anxiety and depression: Convergence with neurobiological findings. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 14(9), 418–424. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2010.06.007CrossRefPubMed

Clark, D. M., Salkovskis, P. M., Ost, L. G., Breitholtz, E., Koehler, K. A., Westling, B. E., Jeavons, A., & Gelder, M. (1997). Misinterpretation of body sensations in panic disorder. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 65, 203–213

Cristea, I. A., Kok, R. N., & Cuijpers, P. (2015). Efficacy of cognitive bias modification interventions in anxiety and depression: Meta-analysis. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 206(1), 7–16. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.114.146761CrossRefPubMed

Edwards, C., Portnow, S., Namaky, N., & Teachman, B. A. (in press). Cognitive Bias Modification and Priming Threat. Cognitive Therapy and Research.

Fodor, L. A., Georgescu, R., Cuijpers, P., Szamoskozi, Ş, David, D., Furukawa, T. A., & Cristea, I. A. (2020). Efficacy of cognitive bias modification interventions in anxiety and depressive disorders: A systematic review and network meta-analysis. Lancet Psychiatry, 7(6), 506–514. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2215-0366(20)30130-9CrossRefPubMed

Gollwitzer, P. M., & Sheeran, P. (2006). Implementation intentions and goal achievement: A meta‐analysis of effects and processes. In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 38, pp. 69–119): Academic Press: San Diego.

Hallion, L. S., & Ruscio, A. M. (2011). A meta-analysis of the effect of cognitive bias modification on anxiety and depression. Psychological Bulletin, 137(6), 940–958. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024355CrossRefPubMed

Hirsch, C. R., Meeten, F., Krahe, C., & Reeder, C. (2016). Resolving ambiguity in emotional disorders: The nature and role of interpretation biases. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 12, 281–305. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-021815-093436CrossRefPubMed

Holmes, E. A., Mathews, A., Dalgleish, T., & Mackintosh, B. (2006). Positive interpretation training: Effects of mental imagery versus verbal training on positive mood. Behavior Therapy, 37(3), 237–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2006.02.002CrossRefPubMed

Hoppitt, L., Illingworth, J. L., MacLeod, C., Hampshire, A., Dunn, B. D., & Mackintosh, B. (2014). Modifying social anxiety related to a real-life stressor using online Cognitive Bias Modification for interpretation. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 52, 45–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2013.10.008CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Hoppitt, L., Mathews, A., Yiend, J., & Mackintosh, B. (2010). Cognitive bias modification: The critical role of active training in modifying emotional responses. Behavior Therapy, 41(1), 73–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2009.01.002CrossRefPubMed

Jones, E. B., & Sharpe, L. (2017). Cognitive bias modification: A review of meta-analyses. Journal of Affective Disorders, 223, 175–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2017.07.034CrossRefPubMed

Kampmann, I. L., Emmelkamp, P. M., & Morina, N. (2016). Meta-analysis of technology-assisted interventions for social anxiety disorder. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 42, 71–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.janxdis.2016.06.007CrossRefPubMed

Karbach, J., & Kray, J. (2009). How useful is executive control training? Age differences in near and far transfer of task-switching training. Developmental Science, 12(6), 978–990. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2009.00846.xCrossRefPubMed

Kuckertz, J. M., Amir, N., Boffa, J. W., Warren, C. K., Rindt, S. E., Norman, S., et al. (2014). The effectiveness of an attention bias modification program as an adjunctive treatment for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 63, 25–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2014.09.002CrossRefPubMed

Lee, J.-S., Mathews, A., Shergill, S., Yiu Chan, D. K., Majeed, N., & Yiend, J. (2015). How can we enhance cognitive bias modification techniques? The effects of prospective cognition. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 49, 120–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbtep.2015.03.007CrossRefPubMed

Lovibond, P. F., & Lovibond, S. H. (1995). The structure of negative emotional states: comparison of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS) with the Beck Depression and Anxiety Inventories. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 33(3), 335–343.CrossRef

Mathews, A., & Mackintosh, B. (2000). Induced emotional interpretation bias and anxiety. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 109(4), 602–615.CrossRef

Mathews, A., & MacLeod, C. (2005). Cognitive vulnerability to emotional disorders. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 1, 167–195. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.clinpsy.1.102803.143916CrossRefPubMed

Mathews, A., Ridgeway, V., Cook, E., & Yiend, J. (2007). Inducing a benign interpretational bias reduces trait anxiety. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 38(2), 225–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbtep.2006.10.011CrossRefPubMed

Menne-Lothmann, C., Viechtbauer, W., Hohn, P., Kasanova, Z., Haller, S. P., Drukker, M. et al. (2014). How to boost positive interpretations? A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of cognitive bias modification for interpretation. PLoS ONE, 9(6), e100925. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0100925CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Murphy, R., Hirsch, C. R., Mathews, A., Smith, K., & Clark, D. M. (2007). Facilitating a benign interpretation bias in a high socially anxious population. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 45(7), 1517–1529. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2007.01.007CrossRefPubMed

Norman, S. B., Cissell, S. H., Means-Christensen, A. J., & Stein, M. B. (2006). Development and validation of an Overall Anxiety Severity And Impairment Scale (OASIS). Depression and Anxiety, 23(4), 245–249. https://doi.org/10.1002/da.20182CrossRefPubMed

Parsons, S., Kruijt, A., & Fox, E. (2016). A cognitive model of psychological resilience. Journal of Experimental Psychopathology, 7(3), 296–310.CrossRef

Prendergast, M., Podus, D., Finney, J., Greenwell, L., & Roll, J. (2006). Contingency management for treatment of substance use disorders: A meta-analysis. Addiction, 101(11), 1546–1560. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1360-0443.2006.01581.xCrossRefPubMed

Rohrbacher, H., Blackwell, S. E., Holmes, E. A., & Reinecke, A. (2014). Optimizing the ingredients for imagery-based interpretation bias modification for depressed mood: Is self-generation more effective than imagination alone? Journal of Affective Disorders, 152–154, 212–218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2013.09.013CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Salemink, E., & van den Hout, M. (2010). Validation of the “recognition task” used in the training of interpretation biases. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 41(2), 140–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbtep.2009.11.006CrossRefPubMed

Schwabe, L., Nader, K., & Pruessner, J. C. (2014). Reconsolidation of human memory: Brain mechanisms and clinical relevance. Biological Psychiatry, 76(4), 274–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsych.2014.03.008CrossRefPubMed

Shapiro, D. N., Chandler, J., & Mueller, P. A. (2013). Using Mechanical Turk to study clinical populations. Clinical Psychological Science, 1(2), 213–220. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167702612469015CrossRef

Steinman, S. A., Portnow, S., Billingsley, A. L., Zhang, D., & Teachman, B. A. (2019). Threat and benign interpretation bias might not be a unidimensional construct. Cognition and Emotion. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2019.1682973CrossRefPubMed

Steinman, S. A., & Teachman, B. A. (2010). Modifying interpretations among individuals high in anxiety sensitivity. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 24(1), 71–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.janxdis.2009.08.008CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Steinman, S. A., & Teachman, B. A. (2014). Reaching new heights: Comparing interpretation bias modification to exposure therapy for extreme height fear. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 82(3), 404–417. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036023CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Steinman, S. A., & Teachman, B. A. (2015). Training less threatening interpretations over the Internet: Does the number of missing letters matter? Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 49(Pt A), 53–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbtep.2014.12.004CrossRefPubMed

Teper, R., Segal, Z. V., & Inzlicht, M. (2013). Inside the mindful mind. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 22(6), 449–454. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721413495869CrossRef

Williams, A. D., Blackwell, S. E., Mackenzie, A., Holmes, E. A., & Andrews, G. (2013). Combining imagination and reason in the treatment of depression: A randomized controlled trial of internet-based cognitive-bias modification and internet-CBT for depression. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 81(5), 793–799. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033247CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Zhang, M., Ying, J., Song, G., Fung, D. S. S., & Smith, H. (2019). Web-based cognitive bias modification interventions for psychiatric disorders: Scoping review. JMIR Mental Health, 6(10), e11841. https://doi.org/10.2196/11841CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Titel: Which Variations of a Brief Cognitive Bias Modification Session for Interpretations Lead to the Strongest Effects?
Auteurs: Shari A. Steinman
Nauder Namaky
Sarah L. Toton
Emily E. E. Meissel
Austin T. St. John
Nha-Han Pham
Alexandra Werntz
Tara L. Valladares
Eugenia I. Gorlin
Sarai Arbus
Miranda Beltzer
Alexandra Soroka
Bethany A. Teachman
Publicatiedatum: 21-10-2020
Uitgeverij: Springer US
Gepubliceerd in: Cognitive Therapy and Research / Uitgave 2/2021
Print ISSN: 0147-5916
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2819
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-020-10168-3

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Andere artikelen Uitgave 2/2021

Testing the Effectiveness of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy in Relieving Nurses’ Ageism Toward Older Adults: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Introduction to the Special Issue on Homework in Cognitive Behavioral Therapy: New Clinical Psychological Science

Self-Reported Cognitive Functions Predict the Trajectory of Paranoid Ideation Over a 15-Year Prospective Follow-Up

Weekly Self-Ratings of Treatment Involvement and Their Relation to Symptom Reduction in Internet Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Insomnia

Homework Completion in Treating Obsessive–Compulsive Disorder with Exposure and Ritual Prevention: A Review of the Empirical Literature

Online Intervention Reduces Hostile Attribution Bias, Anger, Aggressive Driving, and Cyber-Aggression, Results of Two Randomized Trials