↓ Skip to main content

Indicators of implicit and explicit social anxiety influence threat-related interpretive bias as a function of working memory capacity

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
74 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
Indicators of implicit and explicit social anxiety influence threat-related interpretive bias as a function of working memory capacity
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00220
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elske Salemink, Malte Friese, Emily Drake, Bundy Mackintosh, Laura Hoppitt

Abstract

Interpretive biases play a crucial role in anxiety disorders. The aim of the current study was to examine factors that determine the relative strength of threat-related interpretive biases that are characteristic of individuals high in social anxiety. Different (dual process) models argue that both implicit and explicit processes determine information processing biases and behavior, and that their impact is moderated by the availability of executive resources such as working memory capacity (WMC). Based on these models, we expected indicators of implicit social anxiety to predict threat-related interpretive bias in individuals low, but not high in WMC. Indicators of explicit social anxiety should predict threat-related interpretive bias in individuals high, but not low in WMC. As expected, WMC moderated the impact of implicit social anxiety on threat-related interpretive bias, although the simple slope for individuals low in WMC was not statistically significant. The hypotheses regarding explicit social anxiety (with fear of negative evaluation used as an indicator) were fully supported. The clinical implications of these findings are discussed.

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 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 1%
Malaysia 1 1%
Netherlands 1 1%
Unknown 71 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 18%
Student > Bachelor 10 14%
Student > Master 9 12%
Researcher 5 7%
Student > Postgraduate 5 7%
Other 17 23%
Unknown 15 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 43 58%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 5%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Engineering 2 3%
Neuroscience 2 3%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 17 23%
Attention Score in Context

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 23 May 2013.
All research outputs
#18,339,860
of 22,711,242 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#6,052
of 7,128 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#218,027
of 280,736 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#764
of 862 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,711,242 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,128 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% 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 280,736 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 862 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.