BACKGROUND: Acute stress disorder involves prominent symptoms of threat avoidance. Preliminary cross-sectional data suggest that such threat-avoidance symptoms may also manifest cognitively, as attentional threat avoidance. Confirming these findings in a longitudinal study might provide insights on risk prediction and anxiety prevention in traumatic exposures. METHOD: Attention-threat bias and post-traumatic symptoms were assessed in soldiers at two points in time: early in basic training and 23 weeks later, during advanced combat training. Based on random assignment, the timing of the repeat assessment occurred in one of two schedules: for a combat simulation group, the repeat assessment occurred immediately following a battlefield simulation exercise, and for a control group, the assessment occurred shortly before this exercise. RESULTS: Both groups showed no threat-related attention bias at initial assessments. Following acute stress, the combat simulation group exhibited a shift in attention away from threat whereas the control group showed no change in attention bias. Stronger threat avoidance in the combat simulation group correlated with severity of post-traumatic symptoms. Such an association was not found in the control group. CONCLUSIONS: Acute stress may lead some individuals to shift their attention away from threats, perhaps to minimize stress exposure. This acute attention response may come at a psychological cost, given that it correlates with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms. Further research is needed to determine how these associations relate to full-blown PTSD in soldier and civilian populations.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Acute stress disorder involves prominent symptoms of threat avoidance. Preliminary cross-sectional data suggest that such threat-avoidance symptoms may also manifest cognitively, as attentional threat avoidance. Confirming these findings in a longitudinal study might provide insights on risk prediction and anxiety prevention in traumatic exposures. METHOD: Attention-threat bias and post-traumatic symptoms were assessed in soldiers at two points in time: early in basic training and 23 weeks later, during advanced combat training. Based on random assignment, the timing of the repeat assessment occurred in one of two schedules: for a combat simulation group, the repeat assessment occurred immediately following a battlefield simulation exercise, and for a control group, the assessment occurred shortly before this exercise. RESULTS: Both groups showed no threat-related attention bias at initial assessments. Following acute stress, the combat simulation group exhibited a shift in attention away from threat whereas the control group showed no change in attention bias. Stronger threat avoidance in the combat simulation group correlated with severity of post-traumatic symptoms. Such an association was not found in the control group. CONCLUSIONS: Acute stress may lead some individuals to shift their attention away from threats, perhaps to minimize stress exposure. This acute attention response may come at a psychological cost, given that it correlates with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms. Further research is needed to determine how these associations relate to full-blown PTSD in soldier and civilian populations.
Authors: Amy Badura-Brack; Timothy J McDermott; Katherine M Becker; Tara J Ryan; Maya M Khanna; Daniel S Pine; Yair Bar-Haim; Elizabeth Heinrichs-Graham; Tony W Wilson Journal: Psychiatry Res Neuroimaging Date: 2017-11-14 Impact factor: 2.376
Authors: Jennifer C Britton; Jenna G Suway; Michelle A Clementi; Nathan A Fox; Daniel S Pine; Yair Bar-Haim Journal: Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci Date: 2014-10-24 Impact factor: 3.436
Authors: Brian M Iacoviello; Gang Wu; Rany Abend; James W Murrough; Adriana Feder; Eyal Fruchter; Yoav Levinstein; Ilan Wald; Christopher R Bailey; Daniel S Pine; Alexander Neumeister; Yair Bar-Haim; Dennis S Charney Journal: J Trauma Stress Date: 2014-03-06
Authors: Ilan Wald; Kathryn A Degnan; Elena Gorodetsky; Dennis S Charney; Nathan A Fox; Eyal Fruchter; David Goldman; Gad Lubin; Daniel S Pine; Yair Bar-Haim Journal: JAMA Psychiatry Date: 2013-04 Impact factor: 21.596