No abstract

No abstract

Emotion regulation (ER) diversity, defined as the variety, frequency, and evenness of ER strategies used, may predict social anxiety severity. In a sample of individuals with high ( n = 113) and low ( n = 42) social anxiety severity, we tested whether four trait ER diversity metrics predicted group membership. We generalized existing trait ER diversity calculations to repeated measures data to test whether state-level metrics (using 2 weeks of ecological momentary assessment [EMA] data) predicted social anxiety severity within the higher severity group. As hypothesized, higher trait ER diversity within avoidance-oriented strategies predicted greater likelihood of belonging to the higher severity group. At the state level, higher diversity across all ER strategies, and within and between avoidance- and approach-oriented strategies, predicted higher social anxiety severity (but only after analyses controlled for number of submitted EMAs). Only diversity within avoidance-oriented strategies was significantly correlated across trait and state levels. Findings suggest that high avoidance-oriented ER diversity may co-occur with higher social anxiety severity.

Distress tolerance (DT) is central to major etiological theories of, and popular treatments for, borderline personality disorder (PD), but empirical evidence for the connection between DT and borderline PD is inconclusive. Such inconsistency is partly due to limited concordance across DT indices from different measurement domains (e.g., behavioral, physiological). In a student sample (N = 267), we assessed subjective perceptions of DT capabilities, task performance on a distressing laboratory challenge, and borderline pathology. Subjective and behavioral indices of DT were largely unrelated. Further, borderline PD features were moderately associated with self-perceived DT (r = –.53); in contrast, they were weakly related to performance on the DT task (r = –.09). We conclude that there is mixed evidence for an association between borderline pathology and DT. Further, we propose a systematic approach to examining the construct validity of DT in multimethod, multimeasure research that might resolve the equivocal results from prior work.

Anxiety disorders are highly prevalent, and rates increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, most individuals with elevated anxiety do not access treatment due to barriers such as stigma, cost, and availability. Digital mental health programs, such as cognitive bias modification for interpretation (CBM-I), hold promise as a tool to increase access to care. Before widely disseminating CBM-I, we must rigorously test its effectiveness and determine whom it is best positioned to benefit. The present study compared CBM-I against a psychoeducation active comparison condition offered through the public website MindTrails, and also tested whether baseline anxiety tied to COVID-19 influenced the rate of change in anxiety and interpretation bias during and after each intervention. Adults with moderate-to-severe anxiety symptoms were randomly assigned to complete five sessions of either CBM-I or psychoeducation as part of a larger trial, and 608 enrolled in the present study after the first session. As predicted (https://osf.io/2dyzr), CBM-I was superior to psychoeducation at reducing anxiety symptoms (on our primary but not secondary measure: d = -0.31), reducing negative interpretation bias (d range = -0.34 to -0.43), and increasing positive interpretation bias (d = 0.79) by the end of treatment. Results also indicated that individuals higher (vs. lower) in baseline COVID-19 anxiety had stronger decreases in anxiety symptoms while receiving CBM-I but weaker decreases in anxiety symptoms (on the secondary anxiety measure) while receiving psychoeducation. These findings suggest that CBM-I may be a useful anxiety-reduction tool for individuals experiencing higher anxiety tied to uncertain events such as COVID-19.