| Title |
Modifying Adolescent Interpretation Biases Through Cognitive Training: Effects on Negative Affect and Stress Appraisals
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Child Psychiatry & Human Development, May 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10578-013-0386-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Machteld D. Telman, Emily A. Holmes, Jennifer Y. F. Lau |
| Abstract |
Adolescent anxiety is common, impairing and costly. Given the scale of adolescent anxiety and its impact, fresh innovations for therapy are in demand. Cognitive Bias Modification of Interpretations (CBM-I) studies of adults show that by training individuals to endorse benign interpretations of ambiguous situations can improve anxious mood-states particularly in response towards stress. While, these investigations have been partially extended to adolescents with success, inconsistent training effects on anxious mood-states have been found. The present study investigated whether positive versus negative CBM-I training influenced appraisals of stress, in forty-nine adolescents, aged 15-18. Data supported the plasticity of interpretational styles, with positively-trained adolescents selecting more benign resolutions of new ambiguous situations, than negatively-trained adolescents. Positively-trained adolescents also rated recent stressors as having less impact on their lives than negatively-trained adolescents. Thus, while negative styles may increase negative responses towards stress, positive styles may boost resilience. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 110 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 109 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 19 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 18 | 16% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 9% |
| Other | 16 | 15% |
| Unknown | 17 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 64 | 58% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 4% |
| Arts and Humanities | 3 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 10 | 9% |
| Unknown | 23 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 25 August 2016.
All research outputs
#15,365,885
of 22,858,915 outputs
Outputs from Child Psychiatry & Human Development
#575
of 916 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,037
of 194,937 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Child Psychiatry & Human Development
#6
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,858,915 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 916 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.9. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 194,937 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.