Heitland Ivo, Barth Vincent, Winter Lotta, Jahn Niklas, Burak Alev, Sinke Christopher, Krüger Tillmann H C, Kahl Kai G
Department of Psychiatry, Social Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Hannover Medical School, Hanover, Germany.
Division of Clinical Psychology and Sexual Medicine, Hannover Medical School, Hanover, Germany.
Front Psychol. 2020 Mar 31;11:401. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00401. eCollection 2020.
Attentional control has been observed to play an important role in affective disorders by impacting information processing, the ability to exert top-down control in response to distracting stimuli, and by affecting emotional regulation. Prior studies demonstrated an association between attentional control and response to psychotherapy, thereby identifying attentional control as an interesting prognostic pre-treatment factor. Improving attentional control and flexibility is a cornerstone in metacognitive therapy (MCT), which is trained by the use of the Attentional Training Technique (ATT). However, as of yet, it remains unclear if pre-treatment attentional control is related to the effect of ATT.
An aggregated sample of 139 healthy participants [study 1: 85 participants, mean age 23.7 years, previously published (Barth et al., 2019); study 2: 54 participants, mean age 33.7 years, not previously published] performed an attentional performance test battery before and after applying ATT. Before ATT was administered, attentional control was measured using a well-established self-report instrument, i.e., the Attentional Control Scale (ACS; Derryberry and Reed, 2002). ATT was given in 2, 4, or 15 doses and compared to sham ATT. The test battery comprised a selection of established neurocognitive tasks: emotional dot probe, Stroop, 2-back, and dichotic listening.
Sham ATT showed no interaction with ACS score on performance outcome in all tests. At four doses of ATT, ACS score was associated with training response, i.e., subjects with high self-reported attentional control before training showed the largest improvements post-training (all -values <0.05; see Figure 3). At 2 and 15 doses of ATT, the ACS score was unrelated to training response.
This is a first attempt in understanding the optimal dosage in which ATT should be administered dependent on the individual characteristics of each subject pre-training. The current data suggest self-reported attentional control pre-training as a marker to determine an optimal individual ATT training profile. Future studies should investigate if other domains of metacognitions also interact with training outcome and evaluate the extent to which this relationship transfers to clinical samples. If successful, assessing attentional control prior to treatment in clinical samples could be of use regarding personalized therapy plans and treatment outcome.
研究发现,注意力控制通过影响信息处理、应对干扰刺激时进行自上而下控制的能力以及影响情绪调节,在情感障碍中发挥着重要作用。先前的研究表明,注意力控制与心理治疗反应之间存在关联,从而将注意力控制确定为一个有趣的治疗前预后因素。改善注意力控制和灵活性是元认知疗法(MCT)的基石,该疗法通过使用注意力训练技术(ATT)进行训练。然而,截至目前,尚不清楚治疗前的注意力控制是否与ATT的效果相关。
139名健康参与者的汇总样本[研究1:85名参与者,平均年龄23.7岁,先前已发表(Barth等人,2019年);研究2:54名参与者,平均年龄33.7岁,此前未发表]在应用ATT前后进行了注意力表现测试组。在给予ATT之前,使用一种成熟的自我报告工具,即注意力控制量表(ACS;Derryberry和Reed,2002年)来测量注意力控制。ATT以2次、4次或15次剂量给予,并与假ATT进行比较。测试组包括一系列既定的神经认知任务:情绪点探测、斯特鲁普任务、2-back任务和双耳分听任务。
在所有测试中,假ATT在表现结果上与ACS评分均无交互作用。在4次剂量的ATT时,ACS评分与训练反应相关,即训练前自我报告注意力控制能力高的受试者在训练后改善最大(所有p值<0.05;见图3)。在2次和15次剂量的ATT时,ACS评分与训练反应无关。
这是首次尝试根据每个受试者训练前的个体特征来理解ATT的最佳给药剂量。目前的数据表明,训练前自我报告的注意力控制可作为确定个体最佳ATT训练方案的一个指标。未来的研究应调查元认知的其他领域是否也与训练结果相互作用,并评估这种关系在多大程度上适用于临床样本。如果成功,在临床样本中治疗前评估注意力控制对于个性化治疗计划和治疗结果可能会有帮助。