Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42769142›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026

Attentional bias toward emotional faces in cognitive disengagement syndrome.

Eun-Bin Shin, Yu-Jin Choi, Gi-Eun Lee, Jang-Han Lee

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Eun-Bin ShinDepartment of Psychology, Chung-Ang University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Yu-Jin ChoiDepartment of Psychology, Chung-Ang University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Gi-Eun LeeDepartment of Psychology, Chung-Ang University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Jang-Han LeeDepartment of Psychology, Chung-Ang University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Given the conceptual overlap yet increasing distinction between cognitive disengagement syndrome (CDS) and Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), this study examined attentional bias toward emotional faces in adults with CDS and compared their patterns with those of individuals with ADHD to clarify distinct attentional processing profiles. Methods: Following an initial screening of 1,098 adults using the Barkley Adult ADHD Rating Scale and the Adult Concentration Inventory, 96 participants were recruited and categorized into four groups: CDS only ( Results: Results indicated that individuals with CDS (CDS only and CDS+ADHD groups) showed a trend toward a lower proportion of first fixations toward angry faces as compared to those without CDS. In addition, individuals with CDS exhibited longer dwell times for all emotional faces. In contrast, individuals with ADHD symptoms (ADHD only and CDS+ADHD groups) demonstrated greater dwell time specifically for angry faces as compared to those without ADHD symptoms. Discussion: These findings suggest that CDS may be associated with difficulty detecting angry faces at the early stage of attentional processing and with generalized difficulty disengaging from emotional faces at the later stage. By contrast, ADHD symptoms may be selectively associated with anger-specific attentional bias at the later stage. Overall, the present study suggests that CDS and ADHD may be characterized by distinct patterns of attentional processing in response to emotional faces.

Indexed as

ADHDattentional bias toward emotional facesattentional processing of emotional informationcognitive disengagement syndromeeye-tracking

Identifiers

PMID42769142
PMCPMC13590327

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.