Adapting Cognitive Bias Modification to Train Healthy Prospection

Abstract

Prospection, the mental simulation of future events, has been theoretically linked to physical and mental health. Prior studies have found that prospection is malleable; however, no research to our knowledge has tested whether a scalable intervention explicitly targeting the simulation of positive future outcomes can lead to more generalized positive prospection, and enhance positive outlook and reduce distress. The current study tested a novel, web-based cognitive bias modification for interpretation (CBM-I) program designed to shift prospective bias towards more positive (as opposed to negative) representations of future outcomes among 172 participants selected for having a relatively negative baseline expectancy bias. Results showed that following CBM-I, participants in active training conditions exhibited more positive expectations about the future, and increased self-efficacy and growth mindset. Also, optimism increased and depression and anxiety symptoms decreased following active training, but this also occurred for the control condition. Analyses did not suggest that changes in positive expectations mediated changes in positive outlook outcomes. Results suggest that an online prospection intervention can lead to more positive expectations about future events and improve positive outlook, though open questions remain about what accounts for the training effects.

Shifting Episodic Prediction With Online Cognitive Bias Modification: A Randomized Controlled Trial

“…In an initial efficacy trial of a brief online interpretation bias program adapted to target episodic prediction directly, Namaky et al (2019) found promising results for shifting future thinking and positive outlook in college students with relatively negative expectations of the future. The present study is a hybrid efficacy-effectiveness trial that tests the effectiveness and feasibility of this program when delivered to a large sample of adults around the world on our team's public research website called MindTrails.…”

“…Although the initial findings of Namaky et al (2019) were promising, they were limited to a relatively small college sample; based on two time points for most outcomes, from baseline to a short (1-week) follow-up; and did not show condition differences over time for some outcomes (other CBM-I studies have also found mixed results: Jones & Sharpe, 2017;Menne-Lothmann et al, 2014). Moreover, Namaky et al did not assess the effectiveness or feasibility of implementing the intervention on a public platform accessible to adults around the world.…”

“…following Namaky et al (2019) and given that CBM-I studies with multiple sessions have shown larger effects than studies with one session (Menne-Lothmann et al, 2014) and that other studies based on the ambiguous scenarios paradigm have shown effects with four or fewer sessions (e.g., Bowler et al, 2012;Namaky et al, 2019). Assessments were given in a fixed order immediately after each session and at 1-month follow-up (because training and assessment occurred in an established sequence, non-PP participants were also lost to follow-up).…”

“…Expectancy bias was assessed with a modified Expectancy Bias Task (Namaky et al, 2019), a reading judgment task that assesses tendencies to expect positive or negative events.…”

“…To assess eligibility at screening, a relative expectancy bias index score was computed by subtracting the mean perceived likelihood of the four negative events (absolute negative bias) from that of the four positive events (absolute positive bias); in this way, the score accounts for expectations of positive and negative events simultaneously. Eligible participants had index scores below a 1.1111 cutoff, determined by subtracting 0.5 standard deviations from the mean (1.65, SD = 1.08) relative expectancy bias index scores for 776 college students (see Namaky et al, 2019). This meant that participants' biases were more negative than those of nearly 70% of the prior sample, but not necessarily negative at an absolute level.…”