King's College London, Institute of Psychiatry, UK.
J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry. 2014 Mar;45(1):8-14. doi: 10.1016/j.jbtep.2013.05.006. Epub 2013 Jul 15.
Worry is predominantly a verbal-linguistic process with relatively little imagery. This study investigated whether the verbal nature of worry contributes to the maintenance of worry by enhancing attention to threat. It was hypothesised that verbal worry would lead to greater attentional bias to threat than imagery-based worry.
Fifty high-worriers were randomly assigned to one of two groups, one in which they were instructed to worry in a verbal way and one in which they worried in an imagery-based way, before completing a dot probe task as a measure of attention to threat-related words.
Those who worried in verbal form demonstrated greater attentional bias to threat than did those who worried in imagery-based form. These findings could not be accounted for by group differences in personal relevance of or distress associated with worry topics, state mood following worry, levels of the relatedness of participants' worries to stimuli on the dot probe task, trait anxiety, general propensity to worry, nor adherence to the worry training.
The present study only included word stimuli in the dot probe task; inclusion of images would allow for firmly rejecting the hypothesis that the attention effects observed following verbal worry were merely a result of priming verbal threat representations. Also, future studies could include a further control group that does not engage in any form of worry to ascertain that verbal worry increased attentional bias rather than imagery decreasing pre-existing attentional bias.
Possible mechanisms underlying this effect of verbal worry on attention to threat are discussed, together with clinical implications of the current findings.
担忧主要是一种言语语言过程,相对较少涉及意象。本研究旨在探究担忧的言语性质是否通过增强对威胁的注意力而有助于维持担忧。研究假设,与基于意象的担忧相比,言语担忧会导致对威胁的注意力偏向更大。
将 50 名高担忧者随机分配到两个组中的一个,一个组被指示以言语方式担忧,另一个组以基于意象的方式担忧,然后完成点探测任务,以衡量对与威胁相关的词语的注意力。
以言语形式担忧的人比以基于意象的形式担忧的人表现出更大的对威胁的注意力偏向。这些发现不能用以下方面的组间差异来解释:担忧主题的个人相关性或与担忧相关的痛苦、担忧后的状态情绪、参与者的担忧与点探测任务上的刺激之间的相关性水平、特质焦虑、一般担忧倾向,也不能用对担忧训练的遵守来解释。
本研究仅在点探测任务中包含单词刺激;如果包含图像,则可以坚决拒绝以下假设,即言语担忧后观察到的注意力效应仅仅是对言语威胁表示的启动的结果。此外,未来的研究可以包括一个进一步的对照组,即不进行任何形式的担忧,以确定言语担忧是否增加了对威胁的注意力偏向,而不是意象降低了预先存在的注意力偏向。
讨论了言语担忧对威胁注意力的这种影响的可能机制,并讨论了当前发现的临床意义。