Section Experimental Health Psychology, Department of Clinical Psychological Science, Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Section Experimental Health Psychology, Department of Clinical Psychological Science, Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands; Institute for Health and Behaviour, INSIDE, University of Luxembourg, Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg; Department of Experimental Clinical and Health Psychology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
J Pain. 2024 Oct;25(10):104587. doi: 10.1016/j.jpain.2024.104587. Epub 2024 Jun 2.
Contemporary pain models highlight cognitive-processing biases (ie, attention bias [AB], interpretation bias [IB], and memory bias [MB]) as key processes that contribute to poor pain outcomes. However, existing research has yielded inconsistent findings regarding the presence and impact of these biases on pain outcomes. Recognizing the need to explore these biases simultaneously, contemporary pain models suggest that cognitive biases (CBs) are interrelated, and may have a combined impact upon pain problems. The current study aims to investigate the interrelationships between CBs using the PainAIM paradigm, a novel approach enabling simultaneous evaluation of pain-related AB, IB, and MB using cues signaling actual pain rather than symbolic information. We hypothesized the presence and positive associations of biases for pain-related cues and the predictive value of combined AB and IB for poor pain outcomes. Eighty-four healthy participants completed the PainAIM paradigm, followed by a cold pressor task probing pain experience and pain-related task interference. The results indicated an inverse relationship between AB and IB for ambiguous pain cues. In addition, there was a positive association between participants' AB for ambiguous pain and their MB for the same cues. Contrary to our hypotheses, CB indices did not predict experimental pain outcomes. These findings provide support for the interrelationships between pain-related CBs. However, future research on the temporal order of CBs and their combined impact on pain outcomes is needed. By overcoming the limitations associated with traditional paradigms, the PainAIM paradigm offers a promising research tool for the further study of combined CBs in the context of pain. PERSPECTIVE: The current study provides insight into the associations between pain-related CBs (AB, IB, and MB) using ecologically valid (ambiguous) pain cues. The results indicated an inverse association between pain-related AB and IB, while a positive association was found between AB and MB. CBs did however not predict experimental pain outcomes.
当代疼痛模型强调认知处理偏差（即注意偏差[AB]、解释偏差[IB]和记忆偏差[MB]）是导致疼痛不良结局的关键过程。然而，现有研究对于这些偏差在疼痛结局中的存在和影响得出了不一致的结论。鉴于需要同时探索这些偏差，当代疼痛模型表明认知偏差（CBs）是相互关联的，并且可能对疼痛问题产生综合影响。本研究旨在使用疼痛 AIMS 范式研究 CBs 之间的相互关系，这是一种新颖的方法，可以使用表示实际疼痛而不是符号信息的线索同时评估与疼痛相关的 AB、IB 和 MB。我们假设存在与疼痛相关的线索的偏差以及 AB 和 IB 的综合预测值与不良疼痛结局之间存在正相关关系。84 名健康参与者完成了疼痛 AIMS 范式，随后进行了冷加压任务以探测疼痛体验和与疼痛相关的任务干扰。结果表明，对于模棱两可的疼痛线索，AB 和 IB 之间存在反比关系。此外，参与者对模棱两可的疼痛的 AB 与他们对相同线索的 MB 之间存在正相关关系。与我们的假设相反，CB 指数不能预测实验性疼痛结局。这些发现为与疼痛相关的 CBs 之间的相互关系提供了支持。然而，需要对 CBs 的时间顺序及其对疼痛结局的综合影响进行进一步的研究。通过克服传统范式相关的局限性，疼痛 AIMS 范式为在疼痛背景下进一步研究组合 CBs 提供了一种有前途的研究工具。观点：本研究使用生态有效（模棱两可）的疼痛线索，提供了有关与疼痛相关的 CBs（AB、IB 和 MB）之间关联的见解。结果表明，与疼痛相关的 AB 和 IB 之间存在反比关系，而 AB 和 MB 之间存在正相关关系。然而，CBs 并不能预测实验性疼痛结局。
