Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

Research on the efficacy of Attention Bias Modification for depressive symptoms has predominantly yielded unfavorable outcomes. Despite adhering to rigorous conventions in randomized controlled trials, findings from these studies have indicated minimal effect sizes, thereby raising concerns about their limited clinical significance. This may be attributed to the overlapping mechanisms in ABM and the sham comparator, both affecting attentional processes. Participants with a diagnosis of major depressive disorder, with and without comorbid anxiety (N = 101) were randomized to a two-week preregistered randomized trial of ABM compared to sham. Attentional networks were assessed prior to and after the intervention by the Attention Network Task (ANT), and emotional reactivity was assessed in response to a lab-stressor. Irrespective of condition, participants improved their performance on the alerting and executive attentional networks, but not orienting, and stress-induced emotional reactivity was marginally decreased. Changes in attentional networks predicted post-intervention depression scores. It is imperative to reconsider the employment of a sham comparator in the exploration of the clinical efficacy of ABM.

Original publication

DOI

10.1016/j.nsa.2024.104091

Type

Journal article

Journal

Neuroscience Applied

Publication Date

01/01/2024

Volume

3