Looking around in distress: Judgmental and attentional biases in multievidence decision making revealed in anxiety.

IF 3.1 Q2 PSYCHIATRY
Friederike Elisabeth Hedley,Hilary Hei Ting Ngai,Jingwen Jin
{"title":"Looking around in distress: Judgmental and attentional biases in multievidence decision making revealed in anxiety.","authors":"Friederike Elisabeth Hedley,Hilary Hei Ting Ngai,Jingwen Jin","doi":"10.1037/abn0001018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Threat-related biases are core to anxiety. Different cognitive models coexist, with some emphasizing threat avoidance and others focusing on threat maintenance. Previous experimental research has mainly targeted how individuals perceive a single emotional stimulus, but in daily life, people often integrate emotional evidence from various sources to make a summary conclusion. Little is known about how anxiety and anxious apprehension (AP), a key symptom dimension, impact processing of such emotion ensembles. This study investigated threat-related judgmental and attentional biases in emotion ensemble decisions in anxiety. Adult participants with current anxiety disorders (N = 51) and controls (N = 61) took part in an emotion ensemble judgment task, where they decided whether the ensemble, consisting of emotional faces ranging from fearful to happy, was on average more fearful or happier. Eye movements were tracked to measure visual attention allocation, and AP was measured using the Penn State Worry Questionnaire. The anxiety group made more fearful judgments than the control group, and this judgmental bias was related to AP. Eye-tracking results revealed that the anxiety group paid more overt attention to happy stimuli than fearful stimuli, demonstrating fear avoidance. Finally, fear avoidance was associated with a higher proportion of fearful judgment. This study disclosed how individuals with anxiety assess multiple emotional evidence pieces to form a judgment, indicating overt avoidance of threatening evidence but higher weighing of such evidence in subsequent decisions. These findings support the threat-avoidance model in emotion ensemble judgments and the importance of reducing the saliency of threatening evidence during intervention. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).","PeriodicalId":73914,"journal":{"name":"Journal of psychopathology and clinical science","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of psychopathology and clinical science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/abn0001018","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Threat-related biases are core to anxiety. Different cognitive models coexist, with some emphasizing threat avoidance and others focusing on threat maintenance. Previous experimental research has mainly targeted how individuals perceive a single emotional stimulus, but in daily life, people often integrate emotional evidence from various sources to make a summary conclusion. Little is known about how anxiety and anxious apprehension (AP), a key symptom dimension, impact processing of such emotion ensembles. This study investigated threat-related judgmental and attentional biases in emotion ensemble decisions in anxiety. Adult participants with current anxiety disorders (N = 51) and controls (N = 61) took part in an emotion ensemble judgment task, where they decided whether the ensemble, consisting of emotional faces ranging from fearful to happy, was on average more fearful or happier. Eye movements were tracked to measure visual attention allocation, and AP was measured using the Penn State Worry Questionnaire. The anxiety group made more fearful judgments than the control group, and this judgmental bias was related to AP. Eye-tracking results revealed that the anxiety group paid more overt attention to happy stimuli than fearful stimuli, demonstrating fear avoidance. Finally, fear avoidance was associated with a higher proportion of fearful judgment. This study disclosed how individuals with anxiety assess multiple emotional evidence pieces to form a judgment, indicating overt avoidance of threatening evidence but higher weighing of such evidence in subsequent decisions. These findings support the threat-avoidance model in emotion ensemble judgments and the importance of reducing the saliency of threatening evidence during intervention. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).
在痛苦中环顾四周:焦虑中揭示的多证据决策中的判断和注意偏差。
威胁相关的偏见是焦虑的核心。不同的认知模型并存,一些强调威胁避免,另一些强调威胁维护。以往的实验研究主要针对个体如何感知单一的情绪刺激,但在日常生活中,人们往往会综合各种来源的情绪证据来总结结论。焦虑和焦虑理解(AP)作为一个重要的症状维度,如何影响这些情绪组合的加工,目前尚不清楚。本研究探讨了焦虑情绪综合决策中与威胁相关的判断偏差和注意偏差。患有当前焦虑症的成年参与者(N = 51)和对照组(N = 61)参加了一个情绪集合判断任务,在这个任务中,他们决定由从恐惧到快乐的情绪面孔组成的集合是平均更害怕还是更快乐。通过追踪眼球运动来测量视觉注意力分配,通过宾夕法尼亚州立大学焦虑问卷来测量AP。焦虑组比对照组做出更多的恐惧判断,这种判断偏差与AP有关。眼动追踪结果显示,焦虑组对快乐刺激的明显关注多于恐惧刺激,表现出恐惧回避。最后,恐惧回避与更高比例的恐惧判断有关。这项研究揭示了焦虑患者如何评估多种情绪证据来形成判断,表明他们明显避免威胁性证据,但在随后的决定中更看重这些证据。这些发现支持了情绪集合判断中的威胁-回避模型,以及在干预过程中降低威胁证据的显著性的重要性。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA,版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信