↓ Skip to main content

Training attention improves decision making in individuals with elevated self-reported depressive symptoms

Overview of attention for article published in Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, November 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
peer_reviews
1 peer review site

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
116 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
Training attention improves decision making in individuals with elevated self-reported depressive symptoms
Published in
Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, November 2013
DOI 10.3758/s13415-013-0220-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jessica A. Cooper, Marissa A. Gorlick, Taylor Denny, Darrell A. Worthy, Christopher G. Beevers, W. Todd Maddox

Abstract

Depression is often characterized by attentional biases toward negative items and away from positive items, which likely affects reward and punishment processing. Recent work has reported that training attention away from negative stimuli reduced this bias and reduced depressive symptoms. However, the effect of attention training on subsequent learning has yet to be explored. In the present study, participants were required to learn to maximize reward during decision making. Undergraduates with elevated self-reported depressive symptoms received attention training toward positive stimuli prior to performing the decision-making task (n = 20; active training). The active-training group was compared to two other groups: undergraduates with elevated self-reported depressive symptoms who received placebo training (n = 22; placebo training) and a control group with low levels of depressive symptoms (n = 33; nondepressive control). The placebo-training depressive group performed worse and switched between options more than did the nondepressive controls on the reward maximization task. However, depressives that received active training performed as well as the nondepressive controls. Computational modeling indicated that the placebo-trained group learned more from negative than from positive prediction errors, leading to more frequent switching. The nondepressive control and active-training depressive groups showed similar learning from positive and negative prediction errors, leading to less-frequent switching and better performance. Our results indicate that individuals with elevated depressive symptoms are impaired at reward maximization, but that the deficit can be improved with attention training toward positive stimuli.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 116 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 113 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 21%
Researcher 15 13%
Student > Master 13 11%
Student > Bachelor 11 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 4%
Other 23 20%
Unknown 25 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 48 41%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 5%
Neuroscience 5 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Other 11 9%
Unknown 35 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 14 September 2016.
All research outputs
#15,115,997
of 24,003,070 outputs
Outputs from Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience
#547
of 974 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#124,504
of 219,910 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience
#14
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,003,070 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 974 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 219,910 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.