Beyond the modified dot-probe task: A meta-analysis of the efficacy of alternate attention bias modification tasks across domains

Tessa Rooney,Louise Sharpe,Jemma Todd,Stefan Carlo Michalski,Dimitri Van Ryckeghem,Geert Crombez,Ben Colagiuri
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2024.102436
IF: 11.397
2024-04-29
Clinical Psychology Review
Abstract:Attention biases towards disease-relevant cues have been implicated in numerous disorders and health conditions, such as anxiety, cancer, drug-use disorders, and chronic pain. Attention bias modification (ABM) has shown that changing attention biases can change related emotional processes. ABM most commonly uses a modified dot-probe task, which has received increasing criticism regarding its reliability and inconsistent findings. The purpose of the present review was thus to systematically review and meta-analyse alternative tasks used in ABM research. We sought to examine whether alternative tasks significantly changed attention biases and emotional outcomes, and critically examined whether relevant sample, task and intervention characteristics moderated each of these effect sizes. Seventy-four (completer n = 15,294) study level comparisons were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, alternative ABM designs had a medium effect on changing biases ( g = 0.488), and a small, but significant effect on improving clinical outcomes ( g = 0.117). We found this effect to be significantly larger for studies which successfully changed biases compared to those that did not. Across all tasks, it appeared that targeting engagement biases results in the largest change to attention biases. Importantly, we found tasks incorporating gaze-contingency – encouraging engagement with non-biased stimuli – show the most promise for improving emotional outcomes.
psychology, clinical
What problem does this paper attempt to address?