↓ Skip to main content

Internet-Based Attention Bias Modification for Social Anxiety: A Randomised Controlled Comparison of Training towards Negative and Training Towards Positive Cues

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, September 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
10 X users
googleplus
2 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
90 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
222 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Internet-Based Attention Bias Modification for Social Anxiety: A Randomised Controlled Comparison of Training towards Negative and Training Towards Positive Cues
Published in
PLOS ONE, September 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0071760
Pubmed ID
Authors

Johanna Boettcher, Linda Leek, Lisa Matson, Emily A. Holmes, Michael Browning, Colin MacLeod, Gerhard Andersson, Per Carlbring

Abstract

Biases in attention processes are thought to play a crucial role in the aetiology and maintenance of Social Anxiety Disorder (SAD). The goal of the present study was to examine the efficacy of a programme intended to train attention towards positive cues and a programme intended to train attention towards negative cues. In a randomised, controlled, double-blind design, the impact of these two training conditions on both selective attention and social anxiety were compared to that of a control training condition. A modified dot probe task was used, and delivered via the internet. A total of 129 individuals, diagnosed with SAD, were randomly assigned to one of these three conditions and took part in a 14-day programme with daily training/control sessions. Participants in all three groups did not on average display an attentional bias prior to the training. Critically, results on change in attention bias implied that significantly differential change in selective attention to threat was not detected in the three conditions. However, symptoms of social anxiety reduced significantly from pre- to follow-up-assessment in all three conditions (dwithin  = 0.63-1.24), with the procedure intended to train attention towards threat cues producing, relative to the control condition, a significantly greater reduction of social fears. There were no significant differences in social anxiety outcome between the training condition intended to induce attentional bias towards positive cues and the control condition. To our knowledge, this is the first RCT where a condition intended to induce attention bias to negative cues yielded greater emotional benefits than a control condition. Intriguingly, changes in symptoms are unlikely to be by the mechanism of change in attention processes since there was no change detected in bias per se. Implications of this finding for future research on attention bias modification in social anxiety are discussed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 222 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 218 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 45 20%
Researcher 34 15%
Student > Master 34 15%
Student > Bachelor 25 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 7%
Other 29 13%
Unknown 40 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 119 54%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 5%
Neuroscience 6 3%
Social Sciences 6 3%
Other 16 7%
Unknown 48 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 September 2021.
All research outputs
#2,789,485
of 23,806,312 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#35,066
of 203,365 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,443
of 207,620 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#875
of 4,963 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,806,312 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 203,365 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 207,620 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,963 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.