4.3 Article

Attentional Biases in Currently Depressed Children: An Eye-Tracking Study of Biases in Sustained Attention to Emotional Stimuli

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL CHILD AND ADOLESCENT PSYCHOLOGY
Volume 44, Issue 6, Pages 1008-1014

Publisher

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/15374416.2014.930688

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development [R01 HD057066]
  2. National Institute of Mental Health [R01 MH098060]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Cognitive theories state attentional biases contribute to the development and maintenance of depression. Like depressed adults, there is growing evidence for the presence of attentional biases to sad stimuli in depressed youth. Although the direction of this bias among children remains unclear, preliminary evidence indicates attentional avoidance of sad stimuli in children. This is the first known sudy to use eye-tracking to investigate the exact nature of attention biases among depressed children. To assess sustained attention, the current study used eye-tracking and a passive viewing task in which children viewed a series of four facial expressions (angry, happy, sad, neutral) presented simultatiously for 20s on a computer screen. The current study compared the attentional allocation of currently depressed children (n=19; M age=11.21) to a group of never depressed children (n=22; M age=10.82). Consitent with earlier research with children, we found that children with current major or minor depression, compared to children with no history of depression, exhibited attentional avoidance of sad facial stimuil as well as some evidence for preferential attention to happy faces. This study provides additional evidence that although depressed children demonstrate mood congruent attentional biases like that observed depressed adults, the nature of these biases may reflect attentional avoidance of sad stimuli, rather than preferential attention.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available