Effects of cognitive load during interpretation bias modification on interpretation bias and stress reactivity

The role of acute stress recovery in emotional resilience

Background

Resilience refers to the process of demonstrating better outcomes than would be expected based on the adversity one experienced. Resilience is increasingly measured using a residual approach, which typically assesses adversity and mental health outcomes over a longitudinal timeframe. It remains unknown to what extent such a residual-based measurement of resilience is sensitive to variation in acute stress resilience, a candidate resilience factor.

Methods

Fifty-seven emerging adults enrolled in tertiary education completed measures of adversity and emotional experiences. To assess stress recovery, participants were exposed to a lab-based adverse event from which a Laboratory Stress Resilience Index was derived.

Results

We derived a residual-based measure of emotional resilience from regressing emotional experience scores onto adversity scores. This residual-based measure of emotional resilience predicted variance in the Laboratory Stress Resilience Index over and above that predicted by both a traditional resilience measure and the emotional experiences measure. These findings suggest that acute stress resilience may be a factor underpinning variation in emotional resilience, and that the residual-based approach to measuring resilience is sensitive to such variation in stress resilience.

Rewarding Approach Behaviour Attenuates the Return of Pain-Related Avoidance After Successful Extinction with Response Prevention

After successful exposure treatment for chronic pain, pain-related fear and avoidance may return, i.e., relapse may occur. This return of fear and avoidance may be modulated by various post-treatment factors. In this study, we aimed to investigate two potential factors that may affect return of fear and avoidance, i.e. cognitive load and rewarding approach behaviour. In an operant pain-related avoidance conditioning paradigm, healthy pain-free volunteers first learned to fear and avoid an arm-reaching movement that was often paired with painful electrocutaneous stimulation (T1), by performing alternative movements that were less often (T2) or never (T3) paired with pain. During extinction with response prevention, participants were only allowed to perform T1, and pain was omitted. To model relapse, two unexpected painful stimuli were presented (i.e., reinstatement manipulation), after which participants could freely choose among the three arm-reaching movements again. During test, the Low Load group performed an additional easy digit task, whereas the High Load group performed a more cognitively demanding digit task. The Reward group performed the demanding digit task, whilst being rewarded to perform T1. Results showed that pain-related fear and avoidance returned, irrespective of cognitive load imposed. When participants were rewarded to approach T1, however, the return of avoidance, but not fear, was attenuated. Our findings suggest that engaging in rewarding activities may facilitate the maintenance of treatment outcomes, and provide additional support to the growing body of literature indicating a divergent relationship between fear and avoidance. PERSPECTIVE: Results of this experiment suggest that engaging in rewarding activities may optimize exposure treatment for chronic pain, by dampening the return of pain-related avoidance - though not of pain-related fear - after extinction.

Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial investigating the effect of online interpretation bias intervention on stress reactivity in the children of parents with depression: the CoCo study

BACKGROUND

Current preventive interventions for the children of parents with depression demonstrate modest effects on depression incidence. This may be because existing interventions tend to comprise general psychotherapeutic tools, rather than targeting the specific mechanisms underlying familial transmission. Improved theoretical models of familial transmission could enhance the development of targeted interventions. Although existing models assume that cognitive and biological vulnerability factors influence one another, the precise mechanisms are unknown. This project is the first to experimentally test whether negative interpretation bias has an impact on cortisol response in children of parents with depression. This study protocol reports a randomised controlled trial of an interpretation bias intervention which aims to shift participants' interpretation bias in a more positive direction and thereby alter their stress response.

METHODS

Children aged 10-14 years who have i) one parent with a current or previous depression diagnosis, with at least one episode occurring during the child's lifetime and ii) do not have a current or previous psychiatric diagnosis themselves, will be assigned to one of two conditions: an interpretation bias intervention (n = 50) or a structurally similar placebo intervention (n = 50). The interpretation bias intervention consists of a short lab-based cognitive reappraisal of interpretations training, a four-week app-based Cognitive Bias Modification of Interpretations intervention and interpretation bias specific if-then plans. Interpretation bias will be assessed before and after the intervention using the Scrambled Sentences Task. The effect of the intervention on participants' stress response will be assessed by salivary cortisol collected at five different time points: from immediately before until 45 min after administering the Trier Social Stressor Test for Children. Stress reactivity will be measured via baseline to peak cortisol and stress recovery will be measured via the 45 min cortisol marker. We hypothesise that children who participate in the interpretation bias intervention will display a positive shift in interpretation bias and this, in turn, will alter their stress response. Children who receive the placebo intervention are expected to show a smaller positive shift in interpretation bias and stress reactivity.

DISCUSSION

The findings of the present study will contribute to models of familial depression transmission as well as informing preventive interventions. If training a more positive interpretation bias subsequently alters participants' stress response, then incorporating such tools may increase the efficacy of existing preventive interventions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Deutsches Register Klinischer Studien DRKS00028842. Registered August 19, 2022.

For there is nothing either good or bad: a study of the mediating effect of interpretation bias on the association between mindfulness and reduced post-traumatic stress vulnerability

BACKGROUND

Despite increasing interest in the association between mindfulness and reduced trauma vulnerability, and the use of mindfulness in the latest interventions for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), few studies have examined the mechanisms through which mindfulness may influence post-trauma psychopathology. The present study aimed to determine whether negative interpretation bias, the tendency to interpret ambiguous information as negative or threatening rather than positive or safe, mediates the association between higher levels of trait mindfulness and lower levels of PTSD symptoms. Negative interpretation bias was examined due to prior evidence indicating it is associated with being less mindful and post trauma psychopathology.

METHODS

The study examined 133 undergraduate students who reported exposure to one or more potentially traumatic events in their lifetime. Participants completed self-report measures of trait mindfulness (Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire - Short Form; FFMQ-SF) and PTSD symptoms (Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Checklist - Civilian version; PCL-C) as well an interpretation bias task that assessed the degree to which participants interpreted a range of everyday hypothetical scenarios to be threatening to their physical and/or psychological wellbeing.

RESULTS

Results of a mediation analysis indicated a significant negative direct effect of trait mindfulness on PTSD symptomatology (p < .001). There was no evidence that negative interpretation bias mediated this relationship [BCa CI [-0.04, 0.03)], nor was it associated with trait mindfulness (p = .90) and PTSD symptomatology (p = .37).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the current study provide further evidence of the link between trait mindfulness and reduced post-trauma psychopathology while providing no support for the role of negative interpretation bias in this relationship.

Differences in stress system (re-)activity between single and dual- or multitasking in healthy adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AbstractIn the age of digitization, multitasking requirements are ubiquitous, especially in the workplace. Multitasking (MT) describes the activity of performing multiple (at least two) tasks at the same time. Dual tasking (DT) refers to the sequential switching between two tasks. The aim of our systematic review and meta-analysis was first to investigate whether physiological stress systems become activated in response to or during MT/DT and, secondly, whether this (re-)activity is higher compared to single tasking. We focused on the Sympathetic Nervous System (SNS), the Parasympathetic Nervous System (PNS), the hypothalamic-pituitary adrenal (HPA) axis, and the immune system. The systematic review has been pre-registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020181415). A total of twenty-five articles were identified as eligible, in which n = 26 studies were reported, with N = 1,142 participants. Our main findings are that SNS activity is significantly higher and PNS activity is significantly lower during MT/DT than during single tasking. Only two studies were found, in which HPA axis (re-)activity was surveyed. No eligible study was identified in which immune system (re-)activity was investigated. This is the first systematic synthesis of the literature base showing that stress system activity is increased during MT/DT in comparison to single-tasking.

Stress and Emotional Intelligence Shape Giving Behavior: Are There Different Effects of Social, Cognitive, and Emotional Stress?

Acute stress has been linked with prosocial behavior, yet it is entirely unexplored how different types of stressors may affect individuals’ willingness to help: This is particularly relevant while people is experiencing multiple sources of stress due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Here we explore whether different types of stress influence peoples’ giving behavior and the moderating role of emotional intelligence (EI). Undergraduate students were exposed to experimentally induced social, cognitive, or emotional stress and were asked to self-report on their willingness to help and donate to a charity raising funds for COVID-19 and flu patients. Results showed that when compared to a control condition, after being exposed to a social stress, participants were more willing to help a person in need. Our results also provide evidence that, after experiencing a social stress, participants with high (vs low) trait EI were more willing to help, and, as a result, donated more. Findings indicate that moderate levels of distress are associated with increased donations. Interestingly, when stress is not too threatening, high EI can regulate it and promote prosocial behaviors.

Comparing evaluations of social situations for adults who do and do not stutter

PURPOSE

Numerous research studies indicate that stuttering is associated with increased risk for social anxiety disorder (SAD). Interpretation bias is one of four cognitive biases thought to maintain symptoms associated with SAD. Interpretation bias occurs when one evaluates social situations as more negative than they actually are. The purpose of this study was to investigate if adults who do and do not stutter interpret positive, ambiguous, mildly negative, and profoundly negative social situations similarly, or-if like individuals with SAD-adults who stutter exhibit negative interpretation biases.

METHOD

Forty-eight adults who stutter and 42 age-and gender-matched adults who do not stutter participated. Participants completed the Fear of Negative Evaluation (FNE) and were assigned to one of four groups: adults who stutter with high FNE (AWS-High), adults who stutter with low FNE (AWS-Low), adults who do not stutter with high FNE (AWNS-High), and adults who do not stutter with low FNE (AWNS-Low). All participants completed the trait scale of the State Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) and the Interpretation and Judgmental Questionnaire (IJQ). The IJQ contains descriptions of four types of social situations: positive, mildly negative, profoundly negative, and ambiguous. Within each situation type there are five different scenarios, for a total of 20 scenarios across the four situation types. Participants provided written responses to these 20 social scenarios. Qualitative analyses were used to understand how members of each group interpreted the different social scenarios.

RESULTS

Thematic analysis revealed that each group responded in similar ways to each of the social scenarios, regardless of the type of situation. Adults who do and do not stutter with low and high FNE agreed on many themes related to the 20 social scenarios, and they agreed across all four types of social situations. Somewhat surprisingly, the theme "stuttering" was mentioned infrequently by the adults who stutter.

CONCLUSIONS

Results suggested that adults who do and do not stutter with low and high FNE interpret social situations similarly, and that no group demonstrated a negative interpretation bias consistent with what is observed in adults with SAD. The interpretations provided by each group were appropriate to the specific scenarios being evaluated.

Does mindfulness reduce negative interpretation bias?

Negative interpretation bias, or the tendency to interpret ambiguous life events in a negative manner rather than positive or neutral, is a precursor to depression and anxiety. Evidence suggests that mindfulness reduces depression and anxiety, as well as a number of different negative cognitive biases. However, little is known about the association between mindfulness and negative interpretation bias specifically. Across two cross-sectional studies, we investigated this relation. In Study 1 (N = 135), greater trait mindfulness was correlated with less negative interpretation bias. In Study 2 (N = 173), we experimentally tested whether a brief mindfulness induction, compared to a mind-wandering task, decreased negative interpretation bias. Although there was not a direct effect of condition (mindfulness vs. mind-wandering) on negative interpretation bias, there was a significant indirect effect through negative mood. That is, participants in the mind-wandering condition reported greater negative mood following the induction compared to participants in the mindfulness condition, which was associated with more negative interpretation bias. The results suggest mindfulness is associated with less negative interpretation bias and may reduce negative interpretation bias by decreasing negative mood.