2022
DOI: 10.1017/s0954579422000736
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Variability in caregiver attention bias to threat: A Goldilocks effect in infant emotional development?

Abstract: Attention biases to threat are considered part of the etiology of anxiety disorders. Attention bias variability (ABV) quantifies intraindividual fluctuations in attention biases and may better capture the relation between attention biases and psychopathology risk versus mean levels of attention bias. ABV to threat has been associated with attentional control and emotion regulation, which may impact how caregivers interact with their child. In a relatively diverse sample of infants (50% White, 50.7% female), we… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
1
1
1

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 81 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…One approach to remedy these limitations has been to use measures that are more proximal to attention processes than motorically driven button presses. This includes event-related potentials (Kappenman et al, 2014;Thai et al, 2016), functional magnetic resonance imaging (Fu et al, 2017;Price et al, 2015), and stationary eye tracking (Gunther et al, 2023;Waechter et al, 2014). Overall, these studies are more robust and indicate that there are individual differences in attention within anxiety and these differences vary across multiple levels of analysis, based on timescale and functional system.…”
Section: Concerns With Computer-based Attention Bias Researchmentioning
confidence: 92%
“…One approach to remedy these limitations has been to use measures that are more proximal to attention processes than motorically driven button presses. This includes event-related potentials (Kappenman et al, 2014;Thai et al, 2016), functional magnetic resonance imaging (Fu et al, 2017;Price et al, 2015), and stationary eye tracking (Gunther et al, 2023;Waechter et al, 2014). Overall, these studies are more robust and indicate that there are individual differences in attention within anxiety and these differences vary across multiple levels of analysis, based on timescale and functional system.…”
Section: Concerns With Computer-based Attention Bias Researchmentioning
confidence: 92%
“…This information may then be utilized to determine whether it is appropriate to explore for new knowledge or exploit previously successful behavioral repertoires (Pérez-Edgar 2018). At the extreme, caregiver distress, particularly if variable over time (Gunther et al 2022, Vallorani et al 2023, may convey unpredictable conditions, signals that the perceptive infant takes in as evidence for an environment signaling caution.…”
Section: First Hit: Gestation and Infancymentioning
confidence: 99%