Automatic Evaluations in Clinically Anxious and Nonanxious Children and Adolescents

Abstract

Automatic evaluations of clinically anxious and nonanxious children (n = 40, aged 8–16, 18 girls) were compared using a pictorial performance-based measure of automatic affective associations. Results showed a threat-related evaluation bias in clinically anxious but not in nonanxious children. In anxious participants, automatic evaluations of anxiety-relevant stimuli were more negative than those of negative stimuli. In nonanxious participants, evaluations of negative and anxiety-relevant stimuli did not differ. Furthermore, anxious youth had stronger negative evaluations of anxiety-relevant stimuli than nonanxious children. Automatic evaluations of positive, neutral, and negative stimuli did not differ between groups. Threat-related evaluations were predictive of parent-reported, but not child-reported, anxiety.

We thank Jorg Huijding and Reinout Wiers for valuable comments on earlier versions of the article.

Notes

Note: Ratings range from 1 to 9: high valence ratings indicate positivity, low valence ratings indicate negativity; higher arousal ratings indicate more arousal. EAST = Extrinsic Affective Simon Task; IAPS = International Affective Picture Systems.

¹Although consistent RT-based and EP-based EAST effects have been reported in the original EAST study (de Houwer, 2003), it is not unusual that EAST effects are most prominent with EP-based scores (Huijding & de Jong, 2005b). Research in our own group showed that meaningful RT-based scores can be obtained with the pictorial EAST version by focusing instruction on speed, and not, as in the original instructions and in the present study, on both speed and accuracy (Vervoort, 2009). For reasons of clarity and brevity, we choose not to report RT-based EAST scores.

Note: Means with different subscripts differ significantly at p < .001 (one-tailed). CBCL = Child Behavior Checklist 6–18; STAI-C = State Trait Anxiety Inventory for Children.

^a n = 19.

²One-tailed significance is reported, because we had directional expectations.

Note: Bold scores are different from zero at p < .001 (one-tailed). Columns not sharing a subscript indicate group differences at p < .05, one-tailed. Rows not sharing a superscript indicate a within group difference between EAST scores for negative and anxiety-relevant stimuli at p < .05 (one-tailed). EAST = Extrinsic Affective Simon Task.

^a N = 38.

^b n = 19.