Isolating delayed attentional disengagement from biased orienting to signals of threat in anxiety – not there yet.
Saved in:
| Title: | Isolating delayed attentional disengagement from biased orienting to signals of threat in anxiety – not there yet. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Watson, Poppy (AUTHOR), Pearson, Daniel (AUTHOR), Le Pelley, Mike E. (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Cognition & Emotion. Dec2025, Vol. 39 Issue 8, p1875-1900. 26p. |
| Subjects: | Anxiety, Attentional bias, Evaluation research, Research methodology, Emotions, Risk perception |
| Abstract: | It is often argued that increased "attentional bias to threat" in anxiety is due to delayed attentional disengagement from threat stimuli, rather than increased attentional orienting towards such signals. In 2013, [Clarke, P. J. F., Macleod, C., & Guastella, A. J. (2013). Assessing the role of spatial engagement and disengagement of attention in anxiety-linked attentional bias: A critique of current paradigms and suggestions for future research directions. Anxiety, Stress and Coping: An International Journal, 26(1), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1080/10615806.2011.638054] critiqued this literature, pointing out that most studies used paradigms that could not isolate attentional disengagement from attentional orienting. Since this critique, over fifty studies claiming to measure attentional disengagement from threat in anxiety have been published, many using suboptimal methods. In this (preregistered) systematic review and meta-analysis, we outline why many of these paradigms fail to provide a valid measure of attentional disengagement from stimuli with different emotional content. We also highlight studies where the paradigms and task parameters allowed for the valid measurement of attentional disengagement and include a meta-analysis (759 participants) of this subset. Some evidence was observed for slowed disengagement from threat images (relative to neutral) in high-anxious individuals, but heterogeneity across studies was high, and the effect disappeared when restricting the analysis to paradigms that could rule out behavioural freezing as an alternative explanation. Overall, these findings highlight the need for better-quality research in this area and suggest best practices for the field moving forward. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Cognition & Emotion is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
Be the first to leave a comment!
