Bardel M-H, Colombel F
JE 2494, Laboratoire de Psychologie des Pratiques Physiques, Université de Paris-Sud 11, France.
Encephale. 2009 Oct;35(5):409-16. doi: 10.1016/j.encep.2008.08.004. Epub 2009 Feb 7.
During these two last decades, much research has shown that anxiety can be characterised by an attentional bias favouring threat stimuli processing. This bias plays a central role in the development and maintenance of pathological states associated with anxiety. The first part of this article concerns numerous variables that elucidate parts of the appearance and maintenance conditions of attentional bias associated with anxiety. Thus, clinical versus non-clinical states of individuals play an important role in attentional behaviour of anxiety: at an early stage of information processing, which involves mainly automatic processes, the attentional bias appears whatever the status of anxious individuals. At a later stage, which involves controlled processes, non-clinical anxious subjects would be able to use defensive strategies, which allow them to counterbalance the bias that appeared before, while clinical anxious subjects would not be able to ignore this threat, because of the major rooting of their anxiety. A vigilance attentional bias would be shown in clinical individuals throughout a continuum of information processing. In addition, a near unanimous observation highlights the importance of the material specificity in obtaining attentional bias. However, this observation appears less obvious for the subliminal condition in which anxious individuals can perfect a surface analysis of the material, identifying the emotional valence of a word and not its specificity. Literature findings on anxiety impact in order to release more clarity and in an attempt to explain empirical results that sometimes remain contradictory; the second part of this article is particularly focused on another research track, rarely used but very promising: it concerns differentiating the specific roles of anxiety state and anxiety trait in the attentional patterns. The anxiety trait is defined as "an acquired behavioural disposition, which predisposes an individual to perceive a whole of circumstances objectively and not as dangerous or threatening". On the other hand, anxiety state reflects variable component and is defined as an emotive state "characterized by subjective and conscious feelings of apprehension and tension associated with an activation of the autonomous nervous system". For a long time, researchers have mainly focused on this first variable while occulting the second. However, various theoretical models underline that the anxiety trait variable alone is certainly a condition necessary but insufficient in the appearance and maintenance of attentional bias. Thus, some empirical research, highlighting the potential role of the anxiety state was born. Although they have, for the moment, a limited range due to the heterogeneity of their results, these studies open a new route of considerable research. Thus, on the preattentive level, the dominant role of the interaction between anxiety state and anxiety trait in the release of bias was highlighted in a near consensual way. It is not the same at a later stage of information processing, which is a stage where two tracks of results are confronted: a part of research suggests that maintenance of bias is due to, as at the preattentive level, an interactive effect of state and trait anxieties, whereas other research shows a central role of anxiety state in maintenance of attentional bias. Recent studies using different paradigms confirm the idea of a central role of anxiety state. Further research, separating the specific roles of state and trait anxiety, will be necessary to decide clearly.
Various explanatory tracks were suggested to try to clear up these data. Thus, it's possible that the time-course of the stressor may be an important variable. In addition, the review highlights that state anxiety averages are too often far from the norms established by Spielberger et al. In short, if the state anxiety level is not sufficiently high in a number of searches, it then appears difficult to highlight the attentional biases, which are associated with it. Among them, the resort to a methodology combining physiological measurements (salivary index, ocular movements recording...) and cognitive measurements (questionnaires, dot probe paradigm, Stroop task...) seems to warrant a better understanding of attentional processes.
在过去二十年中,大量研究表明,焦虑可表现为对威胁性刺激加工的注意偏向。这种偏向在与焦虑相关的病理状态的发展和维持中起着核心作用。本文的第一部分涉及众多变量,这些变量阐释了与焦虑相关的注意偏向的部分出现和维持条件。因此,个体的临床状态与非临床状态在焦虑的注意行为中起着重要作用:在信息加工的早期阶段,主要涉及自动加工过程,无论焦虑个体的状态如何,都会出现注意偏向。在后期阶段,涉及控制加工过程,非临床焦虑个体能够使用防御策略,使他们能够抵消之前出现的偏向,而临床焦虑个体由于其焦虑的主要根源,无法忽视这种威胁。在整个信息加工连续体中,临床个体都会表现出警觉性注意偏向。此外,几乎一致的观察结果突出了材料特异性在获得注意偏向方面的重要性。然而,对于阈下条件,这种观察结果似乎不那么明显,在阈下条件下,焦虑个体可以对材料进行表面分析,识别单词的情感效价而非其特异性。关于焦虑影响的文献研究结果旨在更清晰地阐释,并试图解释有时仍相互矛盾的实证结果;本文的第二部分特别关注另一条很少使用但非常有前景的研究路径:它涉及区分焦虑状态和焦虑特质在注意模式中的具体作用。焦虑特质被定义为“一种后天习得的行为倾向,使个体倾向于客观地看待整体情况,而不是将其视为危险或威胁”。另一方面,焦虑状态反映可变成分,被定义为一种情绪状态,“其特征是与自主神经系统激活相关的主观和有意识的担忧和紧张感”。长期以来,研究人员主要关注第一个变量,而忽略了第二个变量。然而,各种理论模型强调,仅焦虑特质变量肯定是出现和维持注意偏向的必要但不充分条件。因此,一些突出焦虑状态潜在作用的实证研究应运而生。尽管目前由于结果的异质性,它们的范围有限,但这些研究开辟了一条具有重要意义的新研究途径。因此,在前注意水平上,焦虑状态与焦虑特质之间的相互作用在释放偏向方面的主导作用以近乎一致的方式得到了突出。在信息加工的后期阶段则不同,在这个阶段出现了两条相互矛盾的研究结果:一部分研究表明,与前注意水平一样,偏向的维持是由于状态焦虑和特质焦虑的交互作用,而其他研究则表明焦虑状态在维持注意偏向中起核心作用。最近使用不同范式的研究证实了焦虑状态起核心作用的观点。为了明确做出决定,有必要进一步开展研究,区分状态焦虑和特质焦虑的具体作用。
提出了各种解释路径来试图厘清这些数据。因此,应激源的时间进程可能是一个重要变量。此外,综述强调,状态焦虑平均值往往与斯皮尔伯格等人确定的标准相差甚远。简而言之,如果在一些研究中状态焦虑水平不够高,那么似乎很难突出与之相关的注意偏向。其中,采用结合生理测量(唾液指标、眼动记录……)和认知测量(问卷、点探测范式、斯特鲁普任务……)的方法似乎有助于更好地理解注意过程。