Suppr超能文献

一个关于控制的问题?以认知偏差矫正研究为例,探讨控制条件在实验性精神病理学中的作用。

A Question of Control? Examining the Role of Control Conditions in Experimental Psychopathology using the Example of Cognitive Bias Modification Research.

作者信息

Blackwell Simon E, Woud Marcella L, MacLeod Colin

机构信息

Ruhr-Universität Bochum (Germany).

University of Western Australia (Australia).

出版信息

Span J Psychol. 2017 Oct 26;20:E54. doi: 10.1017/sjp.2017.41.

Abstract

While control conditions are vitally important in research, selecting the optimal control condition can be challenging. Problems are likely to arise when the choice of control condition is not tightly guided by the specific question that a given study aims to address. Such problems have become increasingly apparent in experimental psychopathology research investigating the experimental modification of cognitive biases, particularly as the focus of this research has shifted from theoretical questions concerning mechanistic aspects of the association between cognitive bias and emotional vulnerability, to questions that instead concern the clinical efficacy of 'cognitive bias modification' (CBM) procedures. We discuss the kinds of control conditions that have typically been employed in CBM research, illustrating how difficulties can arise when changes in the types of research questions asked are not accompanied by changes in the control conditions employed. Crucially, claims made on the basis of comparing active and control conditions within CBM studies should be restricted to those conclusions allowed by the specific control condition employed. CBM studies aiming to establish clinical utility are likely to require quite different control conditions from CBM studies aiming to illuminate mechanisms. Further, conclusions concerning the clinical utility of CBM interventions cannot necessarily be drawn from studies in which the control condition has been chosen to answer questions concerning mechanisms. Appreciating the need to appropriately alter control conditions in the transition from basic mechanisms-focussed investigations to applied clinical research could greatly facilitate the translational process.

摘要

虽然对照条件在研究中至关重要,但选择最佳对照条件可能具有挑战性。当对照条件的选择没有紧密围绕特定研究所要解决的具体问题时,很可能会出现问题。这类问题在研究认知偏差的实验性改变的实验性精神病理学研究中日益明显,尤其是当该研究的重点已从关于认知偏差与情绪易感性之间关联的机制方面的理论问题,转向关注“认知偏差矫正”(CBM)程序的临床疗效的问题时。我们讨论了CBM研究中通常采用的对照条件类型,说明了当所提研究问题类型发生变化而所采用的对照条件却未随之改变时可能出现的困难。至关重要的是,基于比较CBM研究中的主动条件和对照条件得出的结论应限于所采用的特定对照条件所允许的那些结论。旨在确立临床效用的CBM研究可能需要与旨在阐明机制的CBM研究截然不同的对照条件。此外,关于CBM干预临床效用的结论不一定能从那些为回答有关机制的问题而选择对照条件的研究中得出。认识到在从以基本机制为重点的研究向应用临床研究的转变中适当改变对照条件的必要性,可能会极大地促进转化过程。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验