Reliability of an interpretation bias task of ambiguous faces and its relationship with social anxiety, depression, and looming maladaptive style
Cargando...
Fecha
2023-03
Título de la revista
ISSN de la revista
Título del volumen
Editor
Springer Science and Business Media Deutschland GmbH
Resumen
Social anxiety (SA) and depression have been associated with negative interpretation biases of social stimuli. Studies often assess these biases with ambiguous faces, as people with SA and depression tend to interpret such faces negatively. However, the test–retest reliability of this type of task is unknown. Our objectives were to develop a new interpretation bias task with ambiguous faces and analyse its properties in terms of test–retest reliability and in relation to SA, depression, and looming maladaptive style (LMS). Eight hundred sixty-four participants completed a task in which they had to interpret morphed faces as negative or positive on a continuum between happy and angry facial expressions. In addition, they filled out scales on SA, depressive symptoms, and LMS. Eighty-four participants completed the task again after 1–2 months. The test–retest reliability was moderate (r =.57–.69). The data revealed a significant tendency to interpret faces as negative for people with higher SA and depressive symptoms and with higher LMS. Longer response times to interpret the happy faces were positively associated with a higher level of depressive symptoms. The reliability of the present task was moderate. The results highlight associations between the bias interpretation task and SA, depression, and LMS.
Palabras clave
Depression
Looming maladaptive style
Negative interpretation biases
Social anxiety
Looming maladaptive style
Negative interpretation biases
Social anxiety
Descripción
Materias
Cita
Prieto-Fidalgo, Á., Mueller, S. C., & Calvete, E. (2023). Reliability of an interpretation bias task of ambiguous faces and its relationship with social anxiety, depression, and looming maladaptive style. International Journal of Cognitive Therapy, 16(1), 81-102. https://doi.org/10.1007/S41811-022-00154-W