Emily E E Meissel1, Huiting Liu2, Elizabeth S Stevens3, Travis C Evans4, Jennifer C Britton5, Allison M Letkiewicz6, Stewart A Shankman6. 1. San Diego State University/UC San Diego Joint Doctoral Program in Clinical Psychology, 6363 Alvarado Ct. San Diego, CA 92120. 2. Evidence Based Treatment Centers of Seattle, 1200 5th Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101. 3. Jesse Brown VA Medical Center, Chicago, IL, 820 S. Damen Avenue, Chicago, IL 60612. 4. VA Boston Healthcare System and Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, 150 S. Huntington Avenue Boston, MA 02130. 5. University of Miami, Coral Gables, FL, P.O. Box 248185 Coral Gables, FL 33124. 6. Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, 446 East Ontario #7-200 Chicago, IL 60611.
Abstract
Background: Attention bias to threat is a fundamental transdiagnostic component and potential vulnerability factor for internalizing psychopathologies. However, the measurement of attentional bias, such as traditional scores from the dot-probe paradigm, evidence poor reliability and do not measure intra-individual variation in attentional bias. Methods: The present study examined, in three independent samples, the psychometric properties of a novel attentional bias (AB) scoring method of the dot-probe task based on responses to individual trials. For six AB scores derived using the response-based approach, we assessed the internal consistency, test-retest reliability, familial associations, and external validity (using Social Anxiety Disorder, a disorder strongly associated with attentional bias to threatening faces). Results: Compared to traditional AB scores, response-based scores had generally better internal consistency (range of Cronbach's alphas: 0.68-0.92 vs. 0.41-0.71), higher test-retest reliabilities (range of Pearson's correlations: 0.26-0.77 vs. -0.05-0.35), and were more strongly related in family members (range of ICCs: 0.11-0.27 vs. 0-0.05). Furthermore, three response-based scores added incremental validity beyond traditional scores and gender in the external validators of current and lifetime Social Anxiety Disorder. Conclusions: Findings indicate that response-based AB scores from the dot-probe task have better psychometric properties than traditional scores.
Background: Attention bias to threat is a fundamental transdiagnostic component and potential vulnerability factor for internalizing psychopathologies. However, the measurement of attentional bias, such as traditional scores from the dot-probe paradigm, evidence poor reliability and do not measure intra-individual variation in attentional bias. Methods: The present study examined, in three independent samples, the psychometric properties of a novel attentional bias (AB) scoring method of the dot-probe task based on responses to individual trials. For six AB scores derived using the response-based approach, we assessed the internal consistency, test-retest reliability, familial associations, and external validity (using Social Anxiety Disorder, a disorder strongly associated with attentional bias to threatening faces). Results: Compared to traditional AB scores, response-based scores had generally better internal consistency (range of Cronbach's alphas: 0.68-0.92 vs. 0.41-0.71), higher test-retest reliabilities (range of Pearson's correlations: 0.26-0.77 vs. -0.05-0.35), and were more strongly related in family members (range of ICCs: 0.11-0.27 vs. 0-0.05). Furthermore, three response-based scores added incremental validity beyond traditional scores and gender in the external validators of current and lifetime Social Anxiety Disorder. Conclusions: Findings indicate that response-based AB scores from the dot-probe task have better psychometric properties than traditional scores.
Entities:
Keywords:
Attention Bias; Masked Faces; Psychometrics; Replication; Social Anxiety Disorder