2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.jrp.2009.07.007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Rejection sensitivity and disruption of attention by social threat cues

Abstract: Two studies tested the hypothesis that Rejection Sensitivity (RS) increases vulnerability to disruption of attention by social threat cues, as would be consistent with prior evidence that it motivates individuals to prioritize detecting and managing potential rejection at a cost to other personal and interpersonal goals. In Study 1, RS predicted disruption of ongoing goal-directed attention by social threat but not negative words in an Emotional Stroop task. In Study 2, RS predicted attentional avoidance of th… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

19
273
3

Year Published

2012
2012
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 258 publications
(295 citation statements)
references
References 44 publications
19
273
3
Order By: Relevance
“…The mean (S.D.) in the present study sample was similar to an adult sample in an earlier study, where n=685 (Cohen's d=0.09, p=0.548) (Berenson et al, 2009) (Table 1). The scale had good reliability (α=0.80).…”
Section: Adult Rejection Sensitivity Questionnairesupporting
confidence: 83%
“…The mean (S.D.) in the present study sample was similar to an adult sample in an earlier study, where n=685 (Cohen's d=0.09, p=0.548) (Berenson et al, 2009) (Table 1). The scale had good reliability (α=0.80).…”
Section: Adult Rejection Sensitivity Questionnairesupporting
confidence: 83%
“…386 of the pertinent group contrasts. In one case a correlation between the bias score and BPD features was reported instead of a group difference [24] . Here we converted Pearson's R to Hedges' g .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Total scores range from 1 to 36, with higher scores indicating greater RS. The RSQ has been found to have sound psychometric properties [19,22]. In this sample, the scale maintained adequate internal consistency (α = 0.70).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 96%