Distinguishing the roles of trait and state anxiety on the nature of anxiety-related attentional biases to threat using a free viewing eye movement paradigm

Abstract

Although attentional biases to threatening information are thought to contribute to the development and persistence of anxiety disorders, it is not clear whether an attentional bias to threat (ABT) is driven by trait anxiety, state anxiety or an interaction between the two. ABT may also be influenced by “top down” processes of motivation to attend or avoid threat. In the current study, participants high, mid and low in trait anxiety viewed high threat-neutral, mild threat-neutral and positive-neutral image pairs for 5 seconds in both calm and anxious mood states while their eye movements were recorded. State anxiety alone, but not trait anxiety, predicted greater maintenance of attention to high threat images (relative to neutral) following the first fixation (i.e., delayed disengagement) and over the time course. Motivation was associated with the time course of attention as would be expected, such that those motivated to look towards negative images showed the greatest ABT over time, and those highly motivated to look away from negative images showed the greatest avoidance. Interestingly, those ambivalent about where to direct their attention when viewing negative images showed the greatest ABT in the first 500 ms of viewing. Implications for theory and treatment of anxiety disorders, as well as areas for further study, are discussed.

Keywords :

• Trait anxiety
• State anxiety
• Attentional bias
• Threat
• Eye movements

The first author would like to thank Jonathan Oakman and Erik Z. Woody for their guidance and support as members of her doctoral committee. The authors would also like to thank Amanda Cheung, Jenna Dawson, Phoebe Lo, Brandon Ralph and Trish L. Varao Sousa for their assistance in data collection and Stephanie Waechter for her continued statistical assistance and invaluable discussions about this programme of research.

Support for this research was obtained by the first author from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) through a Joseph-Armand Bombardier Canadian Graduate Scholarship Doctoral Award and was conducted in fulfillment of the thesis requirement for a Doctorate in Philosophy at the University of Waterloo.

Notes

¹ The 20-item Attentional Control Scale (ACS; Derryberry & Reed, 2002) was administered, but was not associated with any of our eye movement indices and thus removed from the paper.

² When stimulus set was included in the MANOVA, there were no main or interactive effects of stimulus set, p < .95.

³ Detailed procedures and scripts for the state inductions can be requested from the first author.

⁴ Calm induction music was Venus, The Bringer of Peace by Holst; anxious induction music included the Symphony No. 8 in C Minor: 4. Finale: Feierlich, Nicht Schnell by Bruckner and Mars and The Bringer of War by Holst.

⁵ No more than three trials were allowed to have the same presentation arrangement consecutively.

⁶ Calm music included Ave Maria by Bach and Peer Gynt Op.23, No. 13, Act 4 Prelude, Morning by Grieg; anxious music was Grosse Fuge in B flat Major, Op. 133 by Beethoven.

⁷ To view video go to http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=81NeQJWGYJY.

⁸ The current method descriptions included how we determined our sample sizes, all data exclusions, all manipulations and all measures used in the study.

⁹ One participant had no STICSA-State data and was not included in the current analyses.

¹⁰ The same results for trait anxiety were found when using STICSA-Trait scores as a covariate rather than a between-subjects factor for all analyses (PFF, FFGB and PVT).

¹¹ Note that the DASS depression and SDS scores from the screening session were not significantly correlated with any eye movement index of ABT.

¹² A hierarchical regression analysis using the motivation ratings towards and away from negative images on the first step and the interaction of the two ratings on the second step regressed on the PVT for T1 revealed a significant interaction, R ² change (1, 157) = .04, p = .02, indicating that ambivalence (high ratings on both motivation towards and away from negative images) predicted the greatest proportion of first fixations on high threat images.

¹³ There were marginal differences between the engagers and the indifferent groups at T7 & T8, ps = .09.

¹⁴ Although Mogg et al. (2000) found an interaction involving threat intensity and trait anxiety on ABT, the results did not fully support the pattern of ABT predicted by Mogg & Bradley, 1998. Analyses to assess bias scores from chance levels were not included and thus do not allow one to conclude whether biases were present or not.