This study examined the impact of perceptual load on the processing of unattended threat-relevant faces. Participants performed a central letter-classification task while ignoring irrelevant face distractors, which appeared above or below the central task. The face distractors were graded for affective salience by means of aversive fear conditioning, with a conditioned angry face (CS+), an unconditioned angry face (CS−), and a neutral control face. The letter-classification task was presented under conditions of both low and high perceptual load. Results showed that fear conditioned (i.e., CS+) angry face distractors interfered with task performance more than CS− angry or neutral face distractors but that this interference was completely eliminated by high perceptual load. These findings demonstrate that aversively conditioned face distractors capture attention only under conditions of low perceptual load.

Adaptive behavior relies on the ability to effectively and efficiently ignore irrelevant information, an important component of attentional control. The current research found that fundamental difficulties in ignoring irrelevant material are related to dispositional differences in trait propensity to worry, suggesting a core deficit in attentional control in high worriers. The degree of deficit in attentional control correlated with the degree of difficulty in suppressing negative thought intrusions in a worry assessment task. A cognitive training procedure utilizing a flanker task was used in an attempt to improve attentional control. Although the cognitive training was largely ineffective, improvements in attentional control were associated with improvements in the ability to suppress worry-related thought intrusions. Across two studies, the findings indicate that the inability to control worry-related negative thought intrusions is associated with a general deficiency in attentional control.

The impact of trait anxiety and perceptual load on selective attention was examined in a fear conditioning paradigm. A fear-conditioned angry face (CS+), an unconditioned angry face (CS−), or an unconditioned face with a neutral or happy expression were used in distractor interference and attentional probe tasks. In Experiments 1 and 2, participants classified centrally presented letters under two conditions of perceptual load. When perceptual load was high, distractors had no effect on selective attention, even with aversive conditioning. However, when perceptual load was low, strong response interference effects for CS+ face distractors were found for low trait-anxious participants. Across both experiments, this enhanced distractor interference reversed to strong facilitation effects for those reporting high trait anxiety. Thus, high trait-anxious participants were faster, rather than slower, when ignoring CS+ distractors. Using an attentional probe task in Experiment 3, it was found that fear conditioning resulted in strong attentional avoidance in a high trait-anxious group, which contrasted with enhanced vigilance in a low trait-anxious group. These results demonstrate that the impact of fear conditioning on attention is modulated by individual variation in trait anxiety when perceptual load is low. Fear conditioning elicits an avoidance of threat-relevant stimuli in high trait-anxious participants.

Even though memory performance is a commonly researched aspect of Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD), a coherent and unified explanation of the role of specific cognitive factors has remained elusive. To address this, the present meta-analysis examined the predictive validity of Harkin and Kessler's (2011) Executive Function, Binding Complexity and Memory Load (EBL) Classification System concerning affected versus unaffected memory performance in OCD. We employed a multi-level meta-analytic approach (Viechtbauer, 2010) to accommodate the interdependent nature of the EBL model and interdependency of effect sizes (305 effect sizes from 144 studies, including 4424 OCD patients). Results revealed that the EBL model predicted memory performance; i.e., as EBL demand increases, those with OCD performed progressively worse on memory tasks. Executive function was the driving mechanism behind the EBL's impact on OCD memory performance, as it negated binding complexity, memory load, and visual or verbal task differences. Comparisons of sub-task effect sizes were also generally in accord with the cognitive parameters of the EBL taxonomy. We conclude that standardised coding of tasks along individual cognitive dimensions and multi-level meta-analyses provide a new approach to examine multidimensional models of memory and cognitive performance in OCD and other disorders.

No abstract