Attentional processing of unpleasant stimuli in alexithymia: Early avoidance followed by attention maintenance bias

Figures & data

Figure 1. Distribution of alexithymia scores in our study with cutoff scores according to Parker et al. (2003) noted.

Table 1. Means and standard deviations (in parentheses) for dwell time (%) per picture-type perpicture pair

Pair type 1	Illness M (SD)	54.36 (8.85)
	Neutral M (SD)	45.64 (8.85)
Pair type 2	Illness M (SD)	49.36 (6.80)
	Fear M (SD)	50.64 (6.80)
Pair type 3	Fear M (SD)	52.43 (10.45)
	Neutral M (SD)	47.57 (10.45)

Table 2. Summary of linear mixed model examining the effects of picture type, pair type, interval and alexithymia total score on dwell time (percentage)

Fixed Effects		Estimates	CI	P
(Intercept)		50.88	49.11 – 52.65	<0.001
Picture Type (Fear/Health)		-1.76	-4.29 – 0.77	0.172
Pair Type (Negative/Neutral)		0.74	-1.84 – 3.31	0.575
Interval (3 vs 1)		-1.37	-3.76 – 1.02	0.262
Interval (3 vs 2)		-2.12	-4.49 – 0.25	0.080
TAS total score		0.09	-0.08 – 0.26	0.299
Picture Type x Pair Type		3.55	0.25 – 6.85	0.035
Picture Type x Interval (3 vs.1)		2.74	-0.56 – 6.04	0.104
Picture Type x Interval (3 vs.2)		4.24	0.93 – 7.54	0.012
Pair Type x Interval (3 vs.1)		6.55	3.24 – 9.85	<0.001
Pair Type x Interval (3 vs.2)		9.23	5.92 – 12.53	<0.001
Picture Type x TAStotal		-0.18	-0.43 – 0.06	0.144
Pair Type x TAStotal		0.19	-0.05 – 0.44	0.125
Interval (3 vs. 1) x TAStotal		-0.13	-0.37 – 0.10	0.254
Interval (3 vs. 2) x TAStotal		-0.19	-0.41 – 0.04	0.111
Pair Type x Picture Type x Interval (3 vs. 1)		-3.16	-7.83 – 1.51	0.184
Pair Type x Picture Type x Interval (3 vs. 2)		-2.19	-6.86 – 2.48	0.358
Pair Type x Picture Type x TAStotal		0.05	-0.26 – 0.37	0.740
Interval (3 vs. 1) x Picture Type x TAStotal		0.27	-0.05 – 0.59	0.098
Interval (3 vs. 2) x Picture Type x TAStotal		0.37	0.05 – 0.69	0.022
Interval (3 vs. 1) x Pair Type x TAStotal		-0.16	-0.48 – 0.16	0.318
Interval (3 vs. 2) x Pair Type x TAStotal		-0.23	-0.55 – 0.08	0.149
Interval (3 vs. 1) x Picture Type x Pair Type x TAStotal		-0.04	-0.49 – 0.41	0.854
Interval (3 vs. 2) x Picture Type x Pair Type x TAStotal		-0.17	-0.62 – 0.28	0.468
Random Effects	St. Deviation
Intercept		3.25
Picture Type slope (Illness)		4.92
Pair Type slope (Neutral)		5.51
Interval 1 slope		2.70
Interval 2 slope		2.11
Residual		8.41
Random slope-intercept correlation (ρ01)
Picture Type		-0.88
Pair Type		0.26
Interval 1		-0.66
Interval 2		-0.56
Marginal R^2 / Conditional R^2		0.177 / 0.380

Note. Reference category for Picture Type variable is Fear, for Pair Type is Negative and Interval is Interval 3 (i.e., 1000–6500 ms). TAS = Toronto Alexithymia Scale

Figure 2. Pair type x interval effect on the percentage of dwell time. error bars represent 95% confidence intervals.

Figure 3. Picture type x interval effect on percentage of dwell time. error bars represent 95% confidence intervals.

Figure 4. Picture type x interval x total alexithymia score (mean centered) interaction effect on the percentage dwell time. error bars represent 95% confidence intervals.

Parker, J. D. A., Taylor, G. J., & Bagby, R. M. (2003). The 20-item Toronto alexithymia scale: III. reliability and factorial validity in a community population. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 55(3), 269–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3999(02)00578-0

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar