↓ Skip to main content

Attentional biases toward threat: the concomitant presence of difficulty of disengagement and attentional avoidance in low trait anxious individuals

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, July 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
85 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
Attentional biases toward threat: the concomitant presence of difficulty of disengagement and attentional avoidance in low trait anxious individuals
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, July 2014
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00685
Pubmed ID
Authors

Laura Sagliano, Luigi Trojano, Katja Amoriello, Michela Migliozzi, Francesca D’Olimpio

Abstract

Attentional biases toward threats (ABTs) have been described in high anxious individuals and in clinical samples whereas they have been rarely reported in non-clinical samples (Bar-Haim et al., 2007; Cisler and Koster, 2010). Three kinds of ABTs have been identified (facilitation, difficulty of disengagement, and avoidance) but their mechanisms and time courses are still unclear. This study aimed to understand ABTs mechanisms and timing in low trait anxiety (LTA) and high trait anxiety (HTA) anxious individuals. In particular, in an exogenous cueing task we used threatening or neutral stimuli as peripheral cues with three presentation times (100, 200, or 500 ms). The main results showed that HTA individuals have an attentional facilitation bias at 100 ms (likely automatic in nature) whereas LTA individuals show attentional avoidance and difficulty to disengage from threatening stimuli at 200 ms (likely related to a strategic processing). Such findings demonstrate that threat biases attention with specific mechanisms and time courses, and that anxiety levels modulate attention allocation.

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 85 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%
New Zealand 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 81 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 27%
Student > Master 15 18%
Researcher 7 8%
Student > Bachelor 7 8%
Professor 5 6%
Other 13 15%
Unknown 15 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 54 64%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 5%
Neuroscience 3 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 1%
Unspecified 1 1%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 20 24%
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 30 June 2014.
All research outputs
#20,231,820
of 22,757,541 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#23,965
of 29,671 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,050
of 227,590 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#372
of 397 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,757,541 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,671 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 227,590 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 397 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.