Relapse prevention in abstinent alcoholics by cognitive bias modification: Clinical effects of combining approach bias modification and attention bias modification.

BACKGROUND: The advances in experimental psychology in the last decade have led to a greater understanding of cognitive bias, and the investigation of cognitive bias modifications as a therapeutic option. Whilst conventionally such interventions are delivered in a laboratory, technological advances are changing the potential modes of delivery of these interventions. Whereas mobile delivery of interventions might seem to increase accessibility and encourage compliance, this might not be the case for cognitive bias modification interventions. To reduce boredom, researchers have investigated whether gamification of the task could help reduce repetitiveness, and the diminished motivation that participants had over time. In a prior review of cognitive bias modification interventions, a collaboration between academics and developers was recommended to ensure that the developed product is evidence-based. With the increased recognition of the importance of participatory action research, participants could better help conventional intervention to meet their needs. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this article was to describe the iterative steps in the conceptualization of the co-designed gamified cognitive bias modification intervention for individuals with opioid use disorders. METHODS AND RESULTS: A multidisciplinary team worked through the differences in the perspectives offered by healthcare professionals and patient participants, and jointly worked with a developer to conceptualize a new co-designed gamified attention bias modification intervention. The methods shared in this article could be considered and applied to future conceptualization of co-designed interventions.

Download Full-text

Attention and Cognitive Bias Modification Apps: Review of the Literature and of Commercially Available Apps (Preprint)

10.2196/preprints.10034 ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Melvyn Zhang ◽

JiangBo Ying ◽

Guo Song ◽

Daniel SS Fung ◽

Helen Smith

Keyword(s):

Cognitive Bias ◽

Personal Digital Assistant ◽

Attention Bias ◽

Smartphone Application ◽

Cognitive Bias Modification ◽

Mobile App ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Manual Search ◽

Search Terms ◽

Bias Modification

BACKGROUND Automatic processes, such as attentional biases or interpretative biases, have been purported to be responsible for several psychiatric disorders. Recent reviews have highlighted that cognitive biases may be modifiable. Advances in eHealth and mHealth have been harnessed for the delivery of cognitive bias modification. While several studies have evaluated mHealth-based bias modification intervention, no review, to our knowledge, has synthesized the evidence for it. In addition, no review has looked at commercial apps and their functionalities and methods of bias modification. A review is essential in determining whether scientifically validated apps are available commercially and the proportion of commercial apps that have been evaluated scientifically. OBJECTIVE The objective of this review was primarily to determine the proportion of attention or cognitive bias modification apps that have been evaluated scientifically and secondarily to determine whether the scientifically evaluated apps were commercially available. We also sought to identify commercially available bias modification apps and determine the functionalities of these apps, the methods used for attention or cognitive bias modification, and whether these apps had been evaluated scientifically. METHODS To identify apps in the published literature, we searched PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Scopus for studies published from 2000 to April 17, 2018. The search terms used were “attention bias” OR “cognitive bias” AND “smartphone” OR “smartphone application” OR “smartphone app” OR “mobile phones” OR “mobile application” OR mobile app” OR “personal digital assistant.” To identify commercial apps, we conducted a manual cross-sectional search between September 15 and 25, 2017 in the Apple iTunes and Google Play app stores. The search terms used to identify the apps were “attention bias” and “cognitive bias.” We also conducted a manual search on the apps with published evaluations. RESULTS The effectiveness of bias modification was reported in 7 of 8 trials that we identified in the published literature. Only 1 of the 8 previously evaluated apps was commercially available. The 17 commercial apps we identified tended to use either an attention visual search or gamified task. Only 1 commercial app had been evaluated in the published literature. CONCLUSIONS This is perhaps the first review to synthesize the evidence for published mHealth attention bias apps. Our review demonstrated that evidence for mHealth attention bias apps is inconclusive, and quite a few commercial apps have not been validated scientifically.

Download Full-text

A Randomized Trial of Combined tDCS Over Right Inferior Frontal Cortex and Cognitive Bias Modification: Null Effects on Drinking and Alcohol Approach Bias

Alcoholism Clinical and Experimental Research ◽

10.1111/acer.14111 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 43 (7) ◽

pp. 1591-1599 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

Eric D. Claus ◽

Stefan D. Klimaj ◽

Roberta Chavez ◽

Amber D. Martinez ◽

Vincent P. Clark

Keyword(s):

Frontal Cortex ◽

Randomized Trial ◽

Cognitive Bias ◽

Cognitive Bias Modification ◽

Approach Bias ◽

Inferior Frontal Cortex ◽

Bias Modification

Download Full-text

Moving forward with questions of process and procedure in cognitive bias modification research: three points of consideration

10.31234/osf.io/k3vxc ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Sam Parsons

Keyword(s):

Cognitive Bias ◽

Research Question ◽

Cognitive Bias Modification ◽

Clinical Effects ◽

Ongoing Debate ◽

Subsequent Change ◽

Emotional Vulnerability ◽

Study Designs ◽

Bias Modification

There is ongoing debate surrounding the efficacy of Cognitive Bias Modification (CBM) for the reduction of emotional vulnerability. In part, the debate stems from researchers asking different questions of the existing research. Specifically, differences depend on whether researchers were interested in; the clinical effects of CBM procedures (did CBM reduce emotional vulnerability, irrespective of an assessment of bias change?), or the clinical effects of successfully modifying the cognitive bias process of interest via CBM (did CBM change the targeted bias, and did this change in bias predict reductions in emotional vulnerability?). Here, three considerations are raised that, regardless of the research question of interest, have yet to be fully addressed in moving forward with CBM research. First, the need for clarity in study designs to determine which question is being addressed. Second, CBM interventions that routinely produce the intended change in bias need to be developed before addressing whether there is any subsequent change in emotional vulnerability. Third, this relies on developing reliable assessments of bias as an essential foundation for addressing any further questions about processes or procedures.

Download Full-text

Applying the ‘Cognitive Bias Modification’ concept to smoking cessation – A Systematic Review

SUCHT - Zeitschrift für Wissenschaft und Praxis / Journal of Addiction Research and Practice ◽

10.1024/0939-5911/a000454 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 62 (6) ◽

pp. 333-354 ◽

Cited By ~ 9

Author(s):

Stephan Mühlig ◽

Jeanine Paulick ◽

Johannes Lindenmeyer ◽

Mike Rinck ◽

Reto Cina ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Smoking Cessation ◽

Substance Use ◽

Cognitive Bias ◽

Routine Care ◽

Cognitive Bias Modification ◽

Smoking Behaviour ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Approach Bias ◽

Clinical Databases ◽

Bias Modification

Abstract. Background: In recent years, new neurocognitive explanatory approaches such as dual-process theories offer significant progress in understanding long-term relapse in substance use disorders. Based on such explanatory concepts stemming from basic research, novel methods of intervention have been deduced which focus on directly changing cognitive biases. The efficacy of these Cognitive Bias Modification (CBM) concepts has been evaluated in a growing number of studies in the context of different substance use and addictive disorders. By now, there are also first findings for using CBM in the context of smoking. Objectives: To evaluate the empirical evidence, whether CBM qualifies i) for reducing attentional or approach bias towards smoking-related cues, ii) for effectively reducing the high relapse rates in smoking cessation, iii) for the reduction of smoking behaviour and iv) craving. Methods: The systematic evidence search has been carried out in clinical databases (Cochrane Library, PsycArticles, PSYNDEX, PsycINFO, Medline) as well as via manual reverse search. Finally, 12 studies have been identified which met the inclusion criteria (RCT, CBM interventions for smokers; outcomes: change in attentional or approach bias, craving, number of cigarettes smoked, abstinence). Results: Despite the heterogeneity of the studies in terms of sample selection, realisation of interventions and methodological aspects, the findings collectively indicate that different forms and ‘dosages’ of CBM interventions can influence attentional or approach bias in smokers. Also, positive effects on craving and motivation to quit could be detected. Effects on smoking behaviour are inconsistent and often statistically non-significant. First online applications showed encouraging results. Discussion: The results concerning the efficacy of CBM in smoking cessation are still rudimentary and inconsistent. However, a large portion of the studies was not conducted under naturalistic conditions, but rather in laboratories with non-treatment seekers or participants partially motivated to quit. Despite these limitations, the findings can be evaluated as encouraging. The results suggest that CBM will be implemented in routine care as an adjunct intervention within a behavioural therapy-oriented cessation programme. However, specific studies which assess the efficacy of CBM as a component for relapse prevention in smoking cessation intervention in routine care are still lacking.

Download Full-text