Clarke Patrick J F, Notebaert Lies, MacLeod Colin
School of Psychology, University of Western Australia, Crawley 6009, Western Australia, Australia.
BMC Psychiatry. 2014 Jan 15;14:8. doi: 10.1186/1471-244X-14-8.
Attentional bias modification (ABM) represents one of a number of cognitive bias modification techniques which are beginning to show promise as therapeutic interventions for emotional pathology. Numerous studies with both clinical and non-clinical populations have now demonstrated that ABM can reduce emotional vulnerability. However, some recent studies have failed to achieve change in either selective attention or emotional vulnerability using ABM methodologies, including a recent randomised controlled trial by Carlbring et al. Some have sought to represent such absence of evidence as a sound basis not to further pursue ABM as an online intervention. While these findings obviously raise questions about the specific conditions under which ABM procedures will produce therapeutic benefits, we suggest that the failure of some studies to modify selective attention does not challenge the theoretical and empirical basis of ABM. The present paper seeks to put these ABM failures in perspective within the broader context of attentional bias modification research. In doing so it is apparent that the current findings and future prospects of ABM are in fact very promising, suggesting that more research in this area is warranted, not less.
注意偏向矫正(ABM)是多种认知偏向矫正技术之一,这些技术开始展现出作为情感病理学治疗干预手段的前景。现在,针对临床和非临床人群的大量研究已证明,ABM可降低情绪易损性。然而,最近一些研究未能使用ABM方法在选择性注意或情绪易损性方面实现改变,包括卡尔布林等人最近进行的一项随机对照试验。一些人试图将这种缺乏证据的情况作为不再进一步将ABM作为在线干预手段的合理依据。虽然这些发现显然引发了关于ABM程序产生治疗效果的具体条件的问题,但我们认为一些研究未能改变选择性注意并不挑战ABM的理论和实证基础。本文旨在将这些ABM失败的情况置于注意偏向矫正研究的更广泛背景中进行考量。这样做时很明显,ABM目前的研究结果和未来前景实际上非常有希望,这表明该领域需要更多而非更少的研究。