Department of Clinical and Health Psychology, Utrecht University, The Netherlands.
J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry. 2010 Jun;41(2):140-4. doi: 10.1016/j.jbtep.2009.11.006. Epub 2009 Nov 24.
It was recently established that interpretive bias plays a causal role in anxiety. The vast majority of studies examining this causal relationship have used a social script interpretive bias training and have tested whether interpretations were indeed changed. Typically, a recognition task is used as the manipulation check. However, despite its widespread use, this task has not been validated. The aim of the present study was to examine the validity of the recognition task. It was hypothesised that the recognition task should reflect differences in interpretive bias between high and low levels of neuroticism, while it should not be affected by temporarily mood states that result from the interpretive bias modification. Participants scoring high (n = 35) and low (n = 54) on neuroticism followed either a positive or a negative mood induction procedure and subsequently completed the recognition task. Results showed that the recognition task differentiated between individuals scoring high and low on neuroticism. In addition, the task was insensitive to mood state. The data argue in favour of the validity of this measure of trained interpretive bias following the modification of that bias.
最近证实,解释偏差在焦虑中起着因果作用。绝大多数研究该因果关系的研究都使用了社会脚本解释偏差训练,并测试了解释是否确实发生了变化。通常,识别任务被用作操纵检查。然而,尽管它被广泛使用,但该任务尚未得到验证。本研究旨在检验识别任务的有效性。假设该识别任务应反映神经质水平高和低之间的解释偏差差异,而不应受到解释偏差修正导致的暂时情绪状态的影响。神经质得分高(n=35)和低(n=54)的参与者分别进行积极或消极的情绪诱导程序,然后完成识别任务。结果表明,识别任务能够区分神经质得分高和低的个体。此外,该任务对情绪状态不敏感。这些数据支持在修改偏差后,对这种训练后的解释偏差的测量的有效性。