Interpretive habit is strengthened by cognitive bias modification

Hertel, Paula T.; Holmes, Molly; Benbow, Amanda A.

doi:10.1080/09658211.2013.820326

Cited by 10 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…CBM typically involves the repeated training of desired responses; incorporates programmed contingencies between stimuli, responses, and desirable outcomes (e.g., faster task performance); and is assumed to involve the same associative and instrumental learning processes as habit formation, and to work on processes that are often outside conscious awareness. Thus, Hertel and Mathews (2011, p. 528) argued that “in interpretation retraining, contingencies between ambiguous situations and their preexperimental resolutions are, in effect, counterconditioned.” There is now initial evidence supporting the assumption that CBM influences mental habits: Hertel, Holmes, and Benbow (in press) used a variant of Jacoby’s (1996) process dissociation approach to confirm that interpretation bias training changed automatic, habitual processes rather than controlled recollection. Further, there is growing evidence that rumination is associated with biases in disengaging attention from negative information (Koster, De Lissnyder, Derakshan, & De Raedt, 2011), abstract construal (Watkins, 2008), and negative interpretative bias (Mor, Hertel, Ngo, Schachar, & Redak, in press).…”

Section: Implications For the Treatment Of Depressive Ruminationmentioning

confidence: 99%

A habit-goal framework of depressive rumination.

Watkins

Nolen–Hoeksema

2014

Journal of Abnormal Psychology

271

213

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rumination has been robustly implicated in the onset and maintenance of depression. However, despite empirically well-supported theories of the consequences of trait rumination (response styles theory; Nolen-Hoeksema, 1991), and of the processes underlying state episodes of goal-oriented repetitive thought (control theory; Martin & Tesser, 1989, 1996), the relationship between these theories remains unresolved. Further, less theoretical and clinical attention has been paid to the maintenance and treatment of trait depressive rumination. We propose that conceptualizing rumination as a mental habit (Hertel, 2004) helps to address these issues. Elaborating on this account, we propose a framework linking the response styles and control theories via a theoretical approach to the relationship between habits and goals (Wood & Neal, 2007). In this model, with repetition in the same context, episodes of self-focused repetitive thought triggered by goal discrepancies can become habitual, through a process of automatic association between the behavioral response (i.e., repetitive thinking) and any context that occurs repeatedly with performance of the behavior (e.g., physical location, mood), and in which the repetitive thought is contingent on the stimulus context. When the contingent response involves a passive focus on negative content and abstract construal, the habit of depressive rumination is acquired. Such habitual rumination is cued by context independent of goals and is resistant to change. This habit framework has clear treatment implications and generates novel testable predictions.

show abstract

Section: Implications For the Treatment Of Depressive Ruminationmentioning

confidence: 99%

A habit-goal framework of depressive rumination.

Watkins

Nolen–Hoeksema

2014

Journal of Abnormal Psychology

271

213

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In contrast, in the current study, we relied only on probe items for this purpose. We reasoned that the confabulations in recalling training scenarios serve as a proxy measure for this purpose, akin to the procedure used in Hertel et al (2014). The lack of an independent measure that relies on new scenarios may limit the ability to gauge whether changes in inferential style mediate training effect on additional outcome measures.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Evidence for the effects of interpretation on memory was obtained in studies employing cognitive-bias modification for interpretation (CBM-I; e.g., Hertel et al, 2014). In these studies, participants trained to interpret ambiguous scenarios positively or negatively exhibited training-congruent memory biases that reflected their interpretations ( Joormann et al, 2015;Tran et al, 2011).…”

Section: Empirical Articlementioning

confidence: 99%

Inferences Training Affects Memory, Rumination, and Mood

Perlman

Mor

Jacobinski

et al. 2021

Clinical Psychological Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Making negative inferences for negative events, ruminating about them, and retrieving negative aspects of memories have all been associated with depression. However, the causal mechanisms that link negative inferences to negative mood and the interplay between inferences, rumination, and memory have not been explored. In the current study, we used a cognitive-bias modification (CBM) procedure to train causal inferences and assessed training effects on ruminative thinking, memory, and negative mood among people with varying levels of depression. Training had immediate effects on negative mood and rumination but not after recall of a negative autobiographical memory. Note that training affected memory: Participants falsely recalled inferences presented during the training in a training-congruent manner. Moreover, among participants with high levels of depression, training also affected causal inferences they made for an autobiographical memory retrieved after training. Our findings shed light on negative cognitive cycles that may contribute to depression.

show abstract

“…In addition to manipulating interpretations of ambiguity, training must incorporate other processing methods (e.g., Miller et al, 2013;Watkins et al, 2009). The training of cognitive control, of the sort encouraged by mindfulness training (e.g., Teasdale, Segal, & Williams, 1995), might ultimately be necessary to establish controlled opposition to old habits as new habits are developed (see Hertel, Holmes, & Benbow, 2013). In the meantime, however, we emphasize the importance of the present bias demonstration and simulation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Looking on the Dark Side

Hertel

Mor

Ferrari

et al. 2014

Clinical Psychological Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To understand cognitive bases of self-reported ruminative tendencies, we examined interpretations and subsequent memories of ambiguous situations depicting opportunities for rumination. In Experiment 1, we recruited students, randomly assigned them to a distracting or ruminative concentration task, and then measured their latencies to complete fragments that resolved situational ambiguity in either a ruminative or a benign direction. Students in the ruminative task condition who previously self-identified as brooders were quicker to complete ruminative fragments. In Experiment 2, we simulated this bias to investigate its possible contribution to rumination; nonbrooding students were trained to make ruminative or benign resolutions of ambiguous situations. Ruminative training led to more negative continuations of new, potentially ruminative situations in a subsequent transfer task. Next, ruminative training also caused more negatively valenced errors in recalling the ambiguous transfer situations. Finally, after reflection about a personal experience, state-rumination scores were higher in the ruminative condition. These results establish the causal role of interpretation biases in ruminative patterns of thought.

show abstract

Interpretive habit is strengthened by cognitive bias modification

Cited by 10 publications

References 17 publications

A habit-goal framework of depressive rumination.

A habit-goal framework of depressive rumination.

Inferences Training Affects Memory, Rumination, and Mood

Looking on the Dark Side

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About