Which Variations of a Brief Cognitive Bias Modification Session for Interpretations Lead to the Strongest Effects?

Steinman, Shari A.; Namaky, Nauder; Toton, Sarah L; Meissel, Emily E. E.; John, Austin T St; Pham, Nha-Han; Werntz, Alexandra; Valladares, Tara L; Gorlin, Eugenia I.; Arbus, Sarai; Beltzer, Miranda; Soroka, Alexandra; Teachman, Bethany A.

doi:10.1007/s10608-020-10168-3

Cited by 8 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These results provide moderate support for the conclusion that threat generalization gradients remain relatively stable using an identical protocol at two timepoints, but in line with prior work, that reliability is modest in magnitude and related to the specific type of measure. These findings provide useful information regarding the utility of these paradigms for pre-topost measures on the efficacy of behavioral interventions aimed at reducing generalized fear and arousal (e.g., cognitive behavioral therapy or cognitive bias modification for anxiety disorders; Cristea et al, 2015;Steinman et al, 2021).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Test–retest reliability of human threat conditioning and generalization across a 1‐to‐2‐week interval

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Given the increasing use of threat conditioning and generalization for clinical-translational research efforts, establishing test-retest reliability of these paradigms is necessary. Specifically, it is an empirical question whether the same participant evinces a similar generalization gradient of conditioned responses across two sessions with the identical contingencies and stimuli. Here, 51 human volunteers participated in an identical auditory threat acquisition and generalization protocol at two sessions separated by 9 days. Skin conductance responses (SCR) and trial-bytrial shock risk ratings served as primary dependent measures. We used linear mixed effects modeling to test differential threat responses and generalization gradients, and Generalizability (G) theory coefficients to formally assess test-retest reliability of intra-individual stability and change across time. Results showed largely invariant differential conditioning and generalization gradients across time. G coefficients indicated fair reliability for the majority of acquisition and generalization measures. Our findings support reliability of the threat conditioning and generalization paradigm and highlight their utility for assessments of behavioral interventions in mental health research.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Test–retest reliability of human threat conditioning and generalization across a 1‐to‐2‐week interval

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Students in the intervention condition were encouraged to "imagine yourself as the health care provider in the situation described." This is a common feature of CBM intervention to enhance mental imagery of the scenario, which has been shown to improve CBM training (Steinman et al, 2021). In the control condition, students were encouraged to "imagine yourself in the situation described."…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Cognitive Flexibility Scale (Martin & Rubin, 1995) is a 12-item self-report measure to assess mental flexibility, which has been associated with stronger effects in CBM intervention in clinical populations (Steinman et al, 2021). Students rated their agreement with each item using a 6-point scale (1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To control for any systematic discrepancies between the training conditions, trivial quotes were included between control training blocks. Students in the intervention condition were encouraged to “imagine yourself as the health care provider in the situation described.” This is a common feature of CBM intervention to enhance mental imagery of the scenario, which has been shown to improve CBM training (Steinman et al, 2021). In the control condition, students were encouraged to “imagine yourself in the situation described.” Following training, students completed the posttraining measures ( Time 2 ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

I have a dream: Altering medical students’ ethnic bias towards Indigenous population (NZ Māori) using a digital training called cognitive bias modification.

Hsu,

Akuhata-Huntington

2024

Stigma and Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…One reason for the mixed results may be that most current CBM programs emphasize positivity (e.g., consistently training positive interpretations of ambiguous situations). Though reducing negative and increasing positive interpretations potentially addresses the rigid negative biases distressed individuals often experience, it is possible that the more critical cognitive change to promote is flexibility in thinking (i.e., being able to generate a range of possible interpretations to reduce rigid thinking) because this allows individuals to expand their repertoire of responses so they can more readily respond to dynamically changing interpersonal and situational demands (see Steinman et al, 2021). To illustrate, imagine one's partner came home from work and engaged in what might be perceived as a rude behavior (e.g., slamming the door).…”

Section: Relational Flexibility and Relationship Satisfactionmentioning

confidence: 99%

More than one way to say I love you: An Internet‐based intervention for training flexible thinking in romantic relationships

2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives This study developed and pilot‐tested an adaptation of Cognitive Bias Modification (CBM) to target two aspects of relational flexibility in couples: the ability to generate alternative perspectives, and the ability to respond nondefensively when alternative partner perspectives are raised within challenging relationship situations (referred to as flexibility in partner perspectives). Methods CBM‐FlexC training materials were developed in Phase 1, and expert users (N = 4) and end‐point users (N = 7) provided qualitative feedback. Feasibility and preliminary efficacy of CBM‐FlexC were evaluated in Phase 2, using an online sample of distressed couples (N = 18). Using a multiple baseline design, participants completed three baseline assessments, six CBM‐FlexC sessions over 2 weeks, and a 1‐month follow‐up. Results CBM‐FlexC training resulted in greater flexibility in partner perspectives, relationship satisfaction, and general psychological flexibility compared to baseline, and improvements were maintained 1‐month after training when using mixed‐effects models. However, analyses of reliable change (based on graphical inspection and the Reliable Change Index) indicated that most participants did not experience reliable improvement in flexibility in partner perspectives, or relationship satisfaction. Conclusion This pilot study provides some positive signals regarding the potential efficacy of CBM‐FlexC, while pointing to the need for further development to strengthen its effects.

show abstract

Which Variations of a Brief Cognitive Bias Modification Session for Interpretations Lead to the Strongest Effects?

Cited by 8 publications

References 41 publications

Test–retest reliability of human threat conditioning and generalization across a 1‐to‐2‐week interval

Test–retest reliability of human threat conditioning and generalization across a 1‐to‐2‐week interval

I have a dream: Altering medical students’ ethnic bias towards Indigenous population (NZ Māori) using a digital training called cognitive bias modification.

More than one way to say I love you: An Internet‐based intervention for training flexible thinking in romantic relationships

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About