The effect of cognitive bias modification for interpretation on avoidance of pain during an acute experimental pain task

A randomized controlled trial modifying insomnia-consistent interpretation bias in students

This study aimed to determine the causal role of insomnia-consistent interpretation bias within the cognitive model of insomnia, by modifying this bias in students experiencing subclinical levels of insomnia and assessing subsequent effects on sleep parameters. A sample of 128 students underwent randomization to receive either a single session of online Cognitive Bias Modification-Interpretation (CBM-I) or a sham training. Participants then tracked their pre-sleep worry and sleep parameters for seven consecutive days. Interpretation bias was assessed using an encoding-recognition task specifically designed for insomnia-related interpretation bias. The CBM-I manipulation utilized ambiguous scenarios to redirect participants away from making insomnia-related interpretations. Results revealed that CBM-I effectively decreased insomnia-consistent interpretation bias compared to the sham treatment, with interpretation bias being absent post-training in the CBM-I group. This reduction did not lead to improvements in pre-sleep worry or any sleep parameters. This study has been the first to investigate the causal role of interpretation bias on symptoms of insomnia. Although results indicated this bias to be modifiable, its causality within the cognitive model proves to be more complicated. Future research focusing on optimization of cognitive bias modifications could shed more light on the effects of biased cognitions on insomnia symptoms.

The Role of Pain and Interpretation Bias in Fear of Disease Progression in People With Diabetes

Research indicates that fear of progression (FoP) may be a transdiagnostic construct underlying anxiety in people with chronic health conditions. Theories propose that the interpretation of illness-related symptoms (such as pain) might be an important mechanism driving the development of FoP. However, FoP has rarely been studied in diabetes. In this study, we assessed FoP, pain, health threat-related interpretation bias, emotional states, and treatment adherence in 198 participants with type 1 or type 2 diabetes and an age- and gender-matched control group. We hypothesized that 1) people with diabetes will be more likely to interpret ambiguous stimuli as health threat-related than people without diabetes; 2) among those with diabetes, pain severity and interpretation bias will be associated with more severe levels of FoP; and 3) interpretation bias will moderate the relationship between pain severity and FoP in people with diabetes, such that the positive association between pain and FoP will become stronger when people have greater interpretation bias. Our results confirmed that people with diabetes were more likely to interpret ambiguous information as health threat-related compared with people without diabetes, with a large effect (d = .84). Moreover, people with diabetes who reported persistent pain were more likely to interpret ambiguous stimuli as health threat-related (d = .49). Among people with diabetes, pain severity and interpretation bias were significantly associated with FoP. However, we did not find evidence that interpretation bias moderated the relationship between pain and FoP and these relationships could not be accounted for by general psychopathology. PERSPECTIVE: People with diabetes had greater health threat-related interpretation bias than people without diabetes, especially for those with persistent pain and more severe FoP. Both pain severity and interpretation bias were associated with greater FoP, but interpretation bias did not moderate the relationship between pain and FoP.

Interpretation bias and the transition from acute to chronic pain

ABSTRACT

Most theories of pain emphasize cognitive factors in the development of chronicity, but they have rarely been studied in the context of the transition from acute to chronic pain. The aim of the present study was to assess the role of interpretation bias, pain anxiety, and pain avoidance in acute and chronic pain and the transition from acute to chronic pain. Study 1 recruited a sample of N = 85 adults with chronic pain. Study 2 recruited a sample of N = 254 adults with acute pain and followed them up 3 months later. Both studies assessed interpretation bias with the word association task, as well as measuring pain-related anxiety, pain avoidance, pain severity, and pain interference. In study 2, pain outcomes at 3 months were also assessed. Across both acute and chronic pain samples, interpretation bias was associated with pain interference, but not pain severity. Path analysis mediation models for study 2 showed that interpretation bias was associated with increased pain anxiety, which predicted both pain severity and pain interference 3 months later. Pain anxiety was also associated with pain avoidance, but pain avoidance did not predict pain outcomes. This research provides further insight into the transition from acute to chronic pain, suggesting that interpretation bias in acute pain may play a role in pain-related anxiety that drives pain interference, thus maintaining chronic pain. These findings hold promise for further research into potential large-scale preventative interventions targeting interpretation bias and pain anxiety in acute pain.

A double-blind phase II randomized controlled trial of an online cognitive bias modification for interpretation program with and without psychoeducation for people with chronic pain

ABSTRACT

Cognitive bias modification for interpretation (CBM-I) is an effective intervention for anxiety, but there is only a single trial in people with chronic pain. The aim of this randomized controlled trial was to test CBM-I with and without psychoeducation for people with chronic pain. We randomized 288 participants to 4 groups comprising treatment (CBM-I vs placebo) with or without psychoeducation. One hundred and eighty-three participants (64%) completed 4, 15-minute training sessions over 2 weeks. The coprimary outcomes were pain interference and pain intensity. We also measured interpretation bias, fear of movement, catastrophizing, depression, anxiety, and stress. Participants with more psychopathology at baseline were more likely to dropout, as were those allocated to psychoeducation. Intention-to-treat analyses using linear mixed models regression were conducted. Training effects of CBM-I were found on interpretation bias, but not a near-transfer task. Cognitive bias modification of interpretation improved both primary outcomes compared with placebo. For pain interference, there was also a main effect favoring psychoeducation. The CBM-I group improved significantly more than placebo for fear of movement, but not catastrophizing, depression, or anxiety. Cognitive bias modification of interpretation reduced stress but only for those who also received psychoeducation. This trial shows that CBM-I has promise in the management of pain, but there was limited evidence that psychoeducation improved the efficacy of CBM-I. Cognitive bias modification of interpretation was administered entirely remotely and is highly scalable, but future research should focus on paradigms that lead to better engagement of people with chronic pain with CBM-I.

Association between attentional bias to experimentally induced pain and to pain-related words in healthy individuals: the moderating role of interpretation bias

ABSTRACT

Attentional bias to pain-related information may contribute to chronic pain maintenance. It is theoretically predicted that attentional bias to pain-related language derives from attentional bias to painful sensations; however, the complex interconnection between these types of attentional bias has not yet been tested. This study aimed to investigate the association between attentional bias to pain words and attentional bias to the location of pain, as well as the moderating role of pain-related interpretation bias in this association. Fifty-four healthy individuals performed a visual probe task with pain-related and neutral words, during which eye movements were tracked. In a subset of trials, participants were presented with a cold pain stimulus on one hand. Pain-related interpretation and memory biases were also assessed. Attentional bias to pain words and attentional bias to the pain location were not significantly correlated, although the association was significantly moderated by interpretation bias. A combination of pain-related interpretation bias and attentional bias to painful sensations was associated with avoidance of pain words. In addition, first fixation durations on pain words were longer when the pain word and cold pain stimulus were presented on the same side of the body, as compared to on opposite sides. This indicates that congruency between the locations of pain and pain-related information may strengthen attentional bias. Overall, these findings indicate that cognitive biases to pain-related information interact with cognitive biases to somatosensory information. The implications of these findings for attentional bias modification interventions are discussed.

Cognitive Biases in Type 2 Diabetes and Chronic Pain

The aim of the present study was to investigate the role of cognitive processing biases in Type 2 diabetes (T2D) and chronic pain, 2 conditions that are highly co-morbid. The final sample comprised 333 individuals (86 with T2D and chronic pain, 65 with chronic pain, 76 with T2D, 106 without any form of diabetes or pain). Participants completed questionnaires assessing pain and diabetes-related outcomes, as well as measures of interpretation bias, attentional bias, and attentional bias variability. In a 2 (pain status) x 2 (T2D status) x 3 (bias valence) ANOVA design, interpretation biases were found to be stronger in individuals with chronic pain than individuals without pain, although there were no differences according to T2D status. No group differences in attentional biases were found. Among individuals with T2D, greater interpretation bias was associated with better blood glucose control, but also greater fear of hypoglycemia. For individuals with chronic pain, greater interpretation bias and attentional bias variability was associated with worse pain outcomes. Whilst interpretation bias may be present in chronic pain, it also appears to indicate better glycemic control in individuals with T2D. These findings suggest a more dynamic approach to understanding cognitive bias is needed, to consider when these biases are more or less adaptive, so that they can be better harnessed to improve outcomes for individuals with T2D who experience chronic pain. PERSPECTIVE: These findings suggest that cognitive biases can be associated with psychopathology in chronic pain and in T2D, but can also potentially be adaptive in those with T2D. Diabetes management interventions may require a careful balance between promoting sufficient concern to motivate engagement in adaptive diabetes self-management, whilst also minimizing fear of hypoglycemia.

Examining attentional biases, interpretation biases, and attentional control in people with and without chronic pain

ABSTRACT

Psychological models of chronic pain (CP) highlight cognitive-processing biases (ie, attentional biases, interpretation biases, and attentional control) as pivotal processes that uniquely and synergistically impact the development and maintenance of CP. Very few studies explore multiple cognitive biases, and no studies have examined these 3 processes together in a CP sample. Furthermore, there is a lack of research investigating the relationship between these cognitive processes and pain-relevant variables (eg, pain intensity and pain catastrophising). The current study aimed to (1) compare attentional biases, interpretation biases, and attentional control in people with and without CP, (2) explore their interrelationships, and (3) explore their association with pain-related variables. Seventy-four participants with CP and 66 without pain volunteered. Participants completed a visual scanning task with eye tracking, a recognition task, and a flanker task. Traditional and Bayesian analysis indicated no effect of pain status on cognitive-processing biases. All participants, regardless of pain status, demonstrated attentional biases towards pain on some indices of early and late attention, but not interpretation bias or attentional control. There was weak evidence of associations between attentional biases, interpretation biases, and attentional control. Pain intensity was significantly correlated with interpretation biases, and follow-up analyses revealed people with high pain intensity demonstrated an interpretation bias towards pain significantly more than those with low pain intensity. Findings suggest that attentional biases towards pain are ubiquitous, but for people with moderate-to-severe pain, interpretation biases may have a role worthy of further research.

Associations between biased threat interpretations, fear and avoidance of pain and pain-linked disability in adolescent chronic pain patients

BACKGROUND

Biased interpretations of ambiguous bodily threat situations characterize youth with chronic pain, and have been associated with functional disability for this population. Despite predictions by the fear-avoidance model of chronic pain, that fear and avoidance of pain explain the association between threat perceptions and disability, this has not yet been explored in youth with chronic pain. This study aimed to address this gap by investigating these proposed relationships, in addition to the association between bodily threat interpretations and daily aspects of disability (as well as social, and emotional impairments).

METHOD

Sixty-eight adolescents aged 11-18 years old with a clinical diagnosis of chronic pain completed an extended version of the Adolescent Interpretations of Bodily Threat task to assess interpretations of bodily and social threat situations, alongside measures of disability and fear and avoidance of pain.

RESULTS

Using mediation analysis, fear and avoidance of pain statistically accounted for the relationship between negative bodily threat interpretations and functional disability. Significant associations were also demonstrated between negative bodily threat interpretations and adolescent-reported impairments in daily, emotional and social impairments. Data revealed a significant relationship between negative social interpretations and daily functional disability.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings indicate the clinical relevance of bodily and social threat interpretations, and fear and avoidance of pain, for this population and raise further questions regarding the content-specificity of threat interpretations.

SIGNIFICANCE

Psychological theories of pain-associated impact and disability point to fear and avoidance of pain, as well as information-processing biases. Here, we present novel data showing the clinical relevance of bodily and social threat interpretations in explaining pain-related disability amongst youth with chronic pain, potentially by shaping fear and avoidance of pain. Longitudinal designs will be required to assess these temporally sensitive mediation pathways.

Cognitive Biases Toward Pain: Implications for a Neurocognitive Processing Perspective in Chronic Pain and its Interaction With Depression

OBJECTIVES

Information-processing biases such as attentional, interpretation, and memory biases are supposed to play a role in the exacerbation and maintenance of chronic pain. Current research in the area of cognitive biases shows that all these biases seem to have an influence on attention to, interpretation of, and recall of pain and can lead to maladaptive strategies and the exacerbation of pain.

METHODS

We conducted a narrative literature review, considering evidence extracted from various databases including PubMed, MEDLINE, Science Direct, and ProQuest. Search terms included cognitive biases, neurocognitive processing, chronic pain, and depression.

RESULTS

The literature on attentional, interpretative, and memory biases in experimental and chronic pain, as well as their neuronal underpinnings, suggests that the depression of chronic pain patients may differ from the depression of patients without pain. Depressed pain patients show a recall bias for illness-related and health-related stimuli, whereas depressed patients without pain show a bias for depression-related stimuli. In addition, research has shown that catastrophizing, helplessness/hopelessness, and thought suppression as psychological responses to pain are mediators of the relationship between chronic pain and depression.

CONCLUSIONS

Current research supports the importance of individual diagnosis of chronic pain patients and their response patterns of pain, psychological processing, and information processing. This leads to the conclusion that depressed pain patients need other clinical interventions when compared with depressed patients without pain. Previous research showed that a combination of a cognitive-behavioral therapy with mindfulness meditation seems to be a promising approach.

Attentional, interpretation and memory biases for sensory-pain words in individuals with chronic headache

INTRODUCTION

Cognitive biases in attention, interpretation and less consistently memory have been observed in individuals with chronic pain and play a critical role in the onset and maintenance of chronic pain. Despite operating in combination cognitive biases are typically explored in isolation.

AIM

The primary aim of this study was to explore attentional, interpretation and memory biases and their interrelationship in individuals with chronic headache.

METHODS

Twenty-eight participants with chronic headache and 34 healthy controls completed paradigms assessing attentional, interpretation and memory biases with ambiguous sensory-pain and neutral words.

RESULTS

Individuals with chronic pain showed significantly greater pain-related attentional and interpretation biases relative to controls, with no differences in memory bias. No significant correlation was found between any of the three forms of cognitive bias assessed.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

The clinical implications of cognitive biases in individuals with chronic pain remain to be fully explored, although one avenue for future research would be specific investigation of the implications of biased interpretations considering the consistency of results found across the literature for this form of bias.

An attention and interpretation bias for illness-specific information in chronic fatigue syndrome

BACKGROUND

Studies have shown that specific cognitions and behaviours play a role in maintaining chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS). However, little research has investigated illness-specific cognitive processing in CFS. This study investigated whether CFS participants had an attentional bias for CFS-related stimuli and a tendency to interpret ambiguous information in a somatic way. It also determined whether cognitive processing biases were associated with co-morbidity, attentional control or self-reported unhelpful cognitions and behaviours.

METHOD

A total of 52 CFS and 51 healthy participants completed self-report measures of symptoms, disability, mood, cognitions and behaviours. Participants also completed three experimental tasks, two designed specifically to tap into CFS salient cognitions: (i) visual-probe task measuring attentional bias to illness (somatic symptoms and disability) v. neutral words; (ii) interpretive bias task measuring positive v. somatic interpretations of ambiguous information; and (iii) the Attention Network Test measuring general attentional control.

RESULTS

Compared with controls, CFS participants showed a significant attentional bias for fatigue-related words and were significantly more likely to interpret ambiguous information in a somatic way, controlling for depression and anxiety. CFS participants had significantly poorer attentional control than healthy individuals. Attention and interpretation biases were associated with fear/avoidance beliefs. Somatic interpretations were also associated with all-or-nothing behaviour and catastrophizing.

CONCLUSIONS

People with CFS have illness-specific biases which may play a part in maintaining symptoms by reinforcing unhelpful illness beliefs and behaviours. Enhancing adaptive processing, such as positive interpretation biases and more flexible attention allocation, may provide beneficial intervention targets.

Combined cognitive biases for pain and disability information in individuals with chronic headache: A preliminary investigation

Pain-related cognitive biases have been demonstrated in chronic pain patients, yet despite theoretical predictions are rarely investigated in combination. Combined cognitive biases were explored in individuals with chronic headache ( n = 17) and pain-free controls ( n = 20). Participants completed spatial cueing (attentional bias), sentence generation (interpretation bias) and free recall tasks (memory bias), with ambiguous sensory-pain, disability and neutral words. Individuals with chronic headache, relative to controls, showed significantly greater interpretation and memory biases favouring ambiguous sensory-pain words and interpretation bias favouring ambiguous disability words. No attentional bias was found. Further research is needed exploring the temporal pattern of cognitive biases.