McNally R J, Amir N, Louro C E, Lukach B M, Riemann B C, Calamari J E
Harvard University, Department of Psychology, Cambridge, MA 02138.
Behav Res Ther. 1994 Jan;32(1):119-22. doi: 10.1016/0005-7967(94)90092-2.
Panic disorder patients, obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) patients, and normal control subjects performed a computerized Stroop color-naming task in which they named the colors of panic-threat words (e.g. Collapse), general-threat words (e.g. Infectious), positive words related to panic (e.g. Relaxed), and neutral words (e.g. Sleepy). Idiographic stimulus selection ensured their personal emotional relevance for each subject. In accordance with prediction, panic patients, but not OCD patients, exhibited greater interference for panic-threat words than for positive words related to panic and for neutral words. Panic patients did not respond differentially to panic-threat and general-threat words. Complexities concerning attentional bias research in the anxiety disorders are discussed.
惊恐障碍患者、强迫症（OCD）患者和正常对照组受试者进行了一项计算机化的Stroop颜色命名任务，在该任务中，他们要说出惊恐威胁词汇（如“崩溃”）、一般威胁词汇（如“传染性的”）、与惊恐相关的积极词汇（如“放松的”）和中性词汇（如“困倦的”）的颜色。个性化的刺激选择确保了每个受试者对这些词汇具有个人情感相关性。与预测一致，惊恐障碍患者而非强迫症患者在面对惊恐威胁词汇时，比面对与惊恐相关的积极词汇和中性词汇时表现出更大的干扰。惊恐障碍患者对惊恐威胁词汇和一般威胁词汇的反应没有差异。文中讨论了焦虑症注意力偏差研究的复杂性。
