↓ Skip to main content

An integrative review of attention biases and their contribution to treatment for anxiety disorders

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
67 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
202 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
An integrative review of attention biases and their contribution to treatment for anxiety disorders
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, July 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00968
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tom J. Barry, Bram Vervliet, Dirk Hermans

Abstract

Models of exposure therapy, one of the key components of cognitive behavioral therapy for anxiety disorders, suggest that attention may play an important role in the extinction of fear and anxiety. Evidence from cognitive research suggests that individual differences may play a causal role in the onset and maintenance of anxiety disorders and so it is also likely to influence treatment. We review the evidence concerning attention and treatment outcomes in anxiety disorders. The evidence reviewed here suggests that that attention biases assessed at pre-treatment might actually predict improved response to treatment, and in particular that prolonged engagement with threat as measured in tasks such as the dot probe is associated with greater reductions in anxious symptoms following treatment. We examine this research within a fear learning framework, considering the possible role of individual differences in attention in the extinction of fear during exposure. Theoretical, experimental and clinical implications are discussed, particularly with reference to the potential for attention bias modification programs in augmenting treatment, and also with reference to how existing research in this area might inform best practice for clinicians.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 202 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%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 199 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 46 23%
Student > Master 36 18%
Student > Bachelor 21 10%
Researcher 16 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 8%
Other 23 11%
Unknown 44 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 101 50%
Neuroscience 18 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 2%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 2%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 1%
Other 17 8%
Unknown 53 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 22 January 2016.
All research outputs
#5,721,747
of 22,816,807 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#8,246
of 29,760 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#65,664
of 262,361 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#176
of 552 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,816,807 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,760 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 262,361 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 552 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.