高社交焦慮者之注意力偏誤與解釋偏誤的關聯性：檢驗複合認知偏誤假說

目的：探討高社交焦慮者的注意力偏誤與解釋偏誤，同時檢驗兩種認知偏誤之間的關聯性。方法：本研究使用社交互動恐懼量表（Social Interaction Phobia Scale, SIPS）篩選出高社交焦慮（n = 30）與低社交焦慮（n = 32）傾向的大學生參與本研究。所有參與者完成修改版詞句關聯作業，並於作業中記錄參與者的眼動軌跡，以同時測量參與者的注意力偏誤與解釋偏誤。結果：高社交焦慮組對良性線索的總凝視時間比低社交焦慮組少（F(1, 61) = 4.63, p = .035），但對威脅線索沒有注意力偏誤（p ＞ .05）。高社交焦慮組較傾向選擇威脅解釋（F(1, 59) = 37.32, p ＜ .001），且選擇威脅解釋的速度比低社交焦慮組快（F(1, 59) = 8.63, p = .005），對威脅解釋的相信程度也比低社交焦慮組高（F(1, 61) = 6.33, p = .015）；相反地，低社交焦慮組傾向選擇良性解釋（F(1, 59)= 37.32, p ＜ .001），且對良性解釋的相信程度比高社交焦慮組高（F(1, 61) = 6.33,p = .015）。參與者對良性線索的總凝視時間愈短，之後選擇威脅解釋的比例愈高（β = -.28, t = -2.30, p = .025）。結論：本研究支持複合認知偏誤假說，個體的注意力偏誤會影響解釋偏誤，對良性線索投注的注意力愈多，愈不容易產生威脅解釋偏誤。

關鍵字

社交焦慮；注意力偏誤；解釋偏誤；複合認知偏誤假說

並列摘要

Objective: This study aimed to investigate attentional bias and interpretation bias in individuals with high social anxiety and to examine links between attentional bias and interpretation bias. Methods: Potential participants were initially screened using the Social Interaction Phobia Scale. Eligible participants then were invited to participate in this study by e-mail or telephone. Thirty high socially anxious (HSA) and 32 low socially anxious (LSA) undergraduate students volunteered to participate in this study. Participants completed the modified Word Sentence Association Paradigm while their eye movements were concurrently recorded. Results: HSA participants spent less time fixating on benign words than LSA participants did (F(1, 61) = 4.63, p = .035). However, HSA participants did not exhibit attentional bias toward threatening words (p ＞ .05). HSA participants were more likely to adopt a threatening interpretation whereas LSA participants were more likely to adopt a benign interpretation when encountering ambiguous situations (F(1, 59) = 37.32, p ＜ .001). HSA participants were faster than LSA participants to make a threatening interpretation (F(1, 59) = 8.63, p = .005). They also rated threatening interpretations as more convincing when compared with LSA participants (F(1, 61) = 6.33, p = .015). On the contrary, LSA participants rated benign interpretations as more convincing when compared with HSA participant (F(1, 61) = 6.33, p = .015). We also found that lower total viewing time for benign words significantly predicted higher probability of threatening interpretation bias (β = -.28, t = -2.30, p = .025). Conclusion: This study supports the combined cognitive biases hypothesis and suggests that attentional bias can influence interpretation bias. The more attention allocated to benign cues, the lower the probability that an individual will make a threatening interpretation for ambiguous situations.

並列關鍵字

social anxiety ； attentional bias ； interpretation bias ； combined cognitive biases hypothesis

參考文獻

Yu, H., Li, S., Qian, M., Yang, P., Wang, X., Lin, M., & Yao, N. (2014). Time-course of attentional bias for positive social words in individuals with high and low social anxiety. Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 42(4), 479–490. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1352465813000398

Amir, N., Bower, E., Briks, J., & Freshman, M. (2003). Implicit memory for negative and positive social information in individuals with and without social anxiety. Cognition and Emotion, 17(4), 567–583. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930302300

Amir, N., Elias, J., Klumpp, H., & Przeworski, A. (2003). Attentional bias to threat in social phobia: Facilitated processing of threat or difficulty disengaging attention from threat? Behaviour Research and Therapy, 41(11), 1325–1335. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0005-7967(03)00039-1

Amir, N., Prouvost, C., & Kuckertz, J. M. (2012). Lack of a benign interpretation bias in social anxiety disorder. Cognitive Behaviour Therapy, 41(2), 119–129. https://doi.org/10.1080/16506073.2012.662655

Armstrong, T., & Olatunji, B. O. (2012). Eye tracking of attention in the affective disorders: A meta-analytic review and synthesis. Clinical Psychology Review, 32(8), 704–723. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2012.09.004

國際替代計量

高社交焦慮者之注意力偏誤與解釋偏誤的關聯性：檢驗複合認知偏誤假說

全文下載

主題瀏覽