Cognitive bias modification
[1] The procedures are designed to modify information processing via cognitive tasks that use basic learning principles and repeated practice to encourage a healthier thinking style in line with the training contingency.
[2] This allowed for tests of the causal relationship between cognitive biases and emotional states (e.g., does selectively attending to threatening information cause greater anxiety).
Over time, CBM paradigms were developed to modify biases in other areas of information processing, including interpretation, memory, motivation (e.g., approach–avoidance behaviors), and attributional style.
The early success of the procedures in inducing change in bias led researchers to see the potential benefit of CBM as an intervention for emotional and behavioral disorders.
Given that the maladaptive cognitive processes implicated in models of emotional vulnerability and dysfunction are targeted by CBM, there is considerable interest in the theoretical and applied importance of the techniques.
[3] Research on the effectiveness of CBM in shifting attention and interpretation biases has indicated promising evidence in adult populations, though there are also some null results.
Researchers have pointed to the practical benefits offered by CBM, such as scalability and ease of dissemination, potential for augmentation effects with cognitive-behavioral therapy, and cost-effectiveness.
Rather, change in the cognitive bias is induced by introducing a contingency designed such that successful task performance will be enhanced by adoption of a new pattern of responding.
The aim is to respond as quickly as possible to identify the probe with a button-press response, for example, to indicate the letter shown or direction of the arrow presented.
By repeatedly practicing assigning non-threatening meanings to the ambiguous situations, the individual is thought to learn that uncertainty is more likely to be resolved in a benign, rather than negative, way.
In the approach–avoidance task, a commonly used training protocol, individuals are shown images with a certain distinguishing feature on a computer screen, to which they should react as fast as possible using a joystick.
A systematic search in bibliographical databases uncovered 15 randomized studies involving 1043 individuals that compared ABM to a control training procedure.
Results revealed that ABM produces a small but significant reduction in SAD symptoms (g = 0.27), reactivity to speech challenge (g = 0.46), and AB (g = 0.30).
From a clinical point of view, these findings imply that ABM is not yet ready for wide-scale dissemination as a treatment for SAD in routine care.
