Trial reportScientific reports2024
The effect of attentional bias modification on positive affect dynamics.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Negative attentional bias and alterations in positive affect dynamics constitute emotional vulnerability to depression. Attentional bias modification (ABM) aims to reduce emotional vulnerability to depression by fostering attentional deployment towards positive stimuli. In this randomized controlled trial, we examined whether ABM leads to changes in positive affect dynamics in a sample with an emotional vulnerability to depression (N = 65). Affect dynamics were measured based on experience sampling data gathered 14 days before and after ABM. During ABM, participants paid attention to pairs of emotional faces and responded to dots that were appearing in their place. There was an 87% chance for the dots to appear in place of the relatively more positive face, with the purpose to implicitly foster attentional focus on positive stimuli. In the control condition, there was a 50% chance of the dots to appear in place of the positive stimuli. Results showed that the lag-1 autocorrelation of affect ("inertia") increased within the ABM group and decreased in the control group, but the findings were not robust and it was unclear whether ABM was the cause. There were no changes in the other affect dynamics indices. Improvements in depression during ABM were not associated with changes in affect dynamics, and affect dynamics post ABM did not predict depression symptoms six months later. In conclusion, the study showed no clear effect of ABM on affect dynamics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.