A Diffusion Model Account of Threat Processing in Anxiety

The semantic congruity effect refers to the facilitation of judgements (i) when the direction of the comparison of two items coincides with the relative position of the items along the dimension comparison or (ii) when the relative size of a standard and a target stimulus coincides. For example, people are faster in judging 'which is bigger?' for two large items, than judging 'which is smaller?' for two large items (selection paradigm). Also, people are faster in judging a target stimulus as smaller when compared to a small standard, than when compared to a large standard, and vice versa (classification paradigm). We use the Drift Diffusion Model (DDM) to explain the time course of a semantic congruity effect in a classification paradigm. Formal modelling of semantic congruity allows the time course of the decision process to be described, using an established model of decision making. Moreover, although there have been attempts to explain the semantic congruity effect within evidence accumulation models, two possible accounts for the congruity effect have been proposed but their specific predictions have not been compared directly, using a model that could quantitatively account for both; a shift in the starting point of evidence accumulation or a change in the rate at which evidence is accumulated. With our computational investigation we provide evidence for the latter, while controlling for other possible explanations such as a variation in non-decision time or boundary separation, that have not been taken into account in the explanation of this phenomenon.

Download Full-text

Anxiety enhances threat processing without competition among multiple inputs: A diffusion model analysis.

Emotion ◽

10.1037/a0019474 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 10 (5) ◽

pp. 662-677 ◽

Cited By ~ 52

Author(s):

Corey N. White ◽

Roger Ratcliff ◽

Michael W. Vasey ◽

Gail McKoon

Keyword(s):

Diffusion Model ◽

Model Analysis ◽

Threat Processing

Download Full-text

A Diffusion Model Account of the Lexical Decision Task.

Psychological Review ◽

10.1037/0033-295x.111.1.159 ◽

2004 ◽

Vol 111 (1) ◽

pp. 159-182 ◽

Cited By ~ 269

Author(s):

Roger Ratcliff ◽

Pablo Gomez ◽

Gail McKoon

Keyword(s):

Lexical Decision ◽

Lexical Decision Task ◽

Diffusion Model ◽

Decision Task ◽

Model Account

Download Full-text

Interpretation Bias Across Body Dysmorphic, Social Anxiety and Generalized Anxiety Disorder—A Multilevel, Diffusion Model Account

Cognitive Therapy and Research ◽

10.1007/s10608-020-10180-7 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Fanny Alexandra Dietel ◽

Anne Möllmann ◽

Paul-Christian Bürkner ◽

Sabine Wilhelm ◽

Ulrike Buhlmann

Keyword(s):

Anxiety Disorder ◽

Social Anxiety ◽

Diffusion Model ◽

Generalized Anxiety Disorder ◽

Body Dysmorphic Disorder ◽

Interpretation Bias ◽

Generalized Anxiety ◽

Interpretation Biases ◽

Model Account ◽

Current Concerns

Abstract Background Interpretation biases are suggested to be transdiagnostic phenomena, but have rarely been compared across different disorders and current concerns. Methods We investigated explicit, decision-based, and more implicit, reaction time-based interpretation bias in individuals with body dysmorphic disorder (BDD; N = 29), social anxiety disorder (SAD; N = 36), generalized anxiety disorder (GAD; N = 22), and non-clinical controls (NC; N = 32), using an adapted Word Sentence Association Paradigm (WSAP). Results Results indicated that interpretation bias occurred transdiagnostically, while content-specific bias patterns varied meaningfully across groups. BDD and SAD shared explicit and, more inconsistently, implicit interpretation biases for appearance-related and social situations. The GAD group exhibited an explicit and implicit negative interpretation bias for general situations, and an additional implicit lack of positive bias. Mechanistic Wiener diffusion model analyses revealed that interpretation bias patterns were mainly driven by speeded information uptake, potentially mirroring disorder-specific associative memory organization. Conclusions These findings have important implications for understanding interpretation biases as both etiological and treatment factors.

Download Full-text