焦虑注意偏向VIP免费

AbstractCognitiveviewsonanxietyhaveproposedthatattentionalbiasestowardsthreateninginformationinhightraitanxiousindividualsplayanimportantroleinthemaintenanceofanxietyandmayevencausethedevelopmentofclinicalanxietydis-orders.However,theprecisenatureoftheseattentionalbiasesisunderdebate.Inapictorialversionofthedotprobetask,twoaccountsofattentiontothreatwerecon-trastedandthecomponentsofattentioninvolvedinorientingtothreatwereassessed.Overall,theresultssupporttheviewthatallindividualsorienttohighlythreateningpictures,withhightraitanxiousindividualsorientingmorestronglytomoderatelythreateningpicturesthanthelowtraitanxiousindividuals.Attentionalbiastothreatinhightraitanxiousindividualswascausedbyattentionaldisengagementfromthreat.Theseresultsarediscussedinrelationtocognitivemodelsofattentiontothreat.KeywordsAttentionÆAttentionalbiasÆTraitanxietyÆThreatÆDotprobeIntroductionAcoreelementofcognitivetheoriesofanxiety(Beck,Emery,&Greenberg,1985;Eysenck,1992;Williams,Watts,MacLeod,&Mathews,1988,1997)isthatindividualsatriskforthedevelopmentofanxietydisordersarecharacterizedbybiasedattentiveprocessingofthreateninginformation.Thelastdecades,awealthofstudieshavefoundevidenceforthisclaim(forreviews,seeMogg&Bradley,1998;Williamsetal.,1997).Usingcognitive-experimentaltasklikethemodifiedstroopanddotprobetask,researchershavedemonstrateddifferentialattentiveprocessingofthreatinhightraitanxiousindividuals(HTA)comparedtolowtraitanxiousindividuals(LTA).However,theprecisenatureofattentionalbiasesinHTAindividualsisstillunderdebate.TwoissuesseemparticularlyimportantfortheunderstandingofdifferentialattentiontoErnstH.W.Koster(&)ÆG.CrombezÆB.VerschuereÆJ.DeHouwerDepartmentofPsychology,GhentUniversity,HenriDunantlaan2,B-9000Ghent,Belgiume-mail:ernst.koster@ugent.beCognTherRes(2006)30:635–643DOI10.1007/s10608-006-9042-9123ORIGINALARTICLEAttentiontoThreatinAnxiety-proneIndividuals:MechanismsUnderlyingAttentionalBiasErnstH.W.KosterÆGeertCrombezÆBrunoVerschuereÆJanDeHouwerPublishedonline:10October2006�SpringerScience+BusinessMedia,Inc.2006threatbetweenHTAandLTA:(1)themechanismsunderlyingattentionalbiasand(2)thecomponentsofattentioninvolvedinattentionalbiases.First,thereisanongoingdebateonthecognitivemechanismsunderlyingattentionalbiasinHTAindividuals.Modelsofattentiontothreatintraitanxietycanbedividedintotwoclassesthatpredictopposingpatternsofattentionalbias(cf.Wilson&MacLeod,2003):biasedattentionaldirectionaccounts(e.g.Williamsetal.,1988)versusshiftedattentionalfunctionaccounts(e.g.Mathews&Mackintosh,1998;Mogg&Bradley,1998).Inthebiasedattentionaldirectionaccounts,itisproposedthatHTAandLTAindividualsdifferinthedirectionofattentiontothreat.ThesemodelspositthatHTAindividualswillorienttowardsthreat,whereasLTAindividualswillorientawayfromthreat(Williamsetal.,1988;1997).Shiftedattentionalfunctionaccountsofattentionalbiaseshaveemphasizedthatattentiontohighlythreateninginformationisanadaptiveprocess,presentinbothHTAandLTAindividuals.ThesemodelsproposethatHTAalreadyorienttomoderatethreat,whereasLTAwillonlyorienttostimuliwithhighthreatlevels.Thesemodelshavebeencontrastedinstudiesusingthevisualdotprobetask(MacLeod,Mathews,&Tata,1986).Inthistask,picturepairs,consistingofathrea-teningandaneutralstimulus,arebriefly(e.g.500ms)presented.Then,adotprobereplacesthethreateningstimulus(referredtoasa‘‘congruent’...