Abstract
ABSTRACTMany cognitive bias modification (CBM) tasks use facial expressions of emotion as stimuli. Some tasks use unique facial stimuli, while others use composite stimuli, given evidence that emotion is encoded prototypically. However, CBM using composite stimuli may be identity- or emotion-specific, and may not generalise to other stimuli. We investigated the generalisability of effects using composite faces in two experiments. Healthy adults in each study were randomised to one of four training conditions: two stimulus-congruent conditions, where same faces were used during all phases of the task, and two stimulus-incongruent conditions, where faces of the opposite sex (Experiment 1) or faces depicting another emotion (Experiment 2) were used after the modification phase. Our results suggested that training effects generalised across identities. However, our results indicated only partial generalisation across emotions. These findings suggest effects obtained using composite stimuli may extend beyond the stimuli used in the task but remain emotion-specific.
Highlights
Cognitive-bias modification (CBM) techniques are designed to modify the cognitive biases characteristic of a number of psychopathologies such as depression (Micco, Henin, & Hirshfeld-Becker, 2014) and social anxiety (Hoppitt et al, 2014)
Our results indicate that Emotion recognition training (ERT) using composite faces generalises to other similar but non-trained faces
Since training effects have been shown to persist over several days (Penton-Voak et al, 2012), this suggests that the training effect may influence the interpretation of ambiguous emotional expressions in naturalistic settings
Summary
Cognitive-bias modification (CBM) techniques are designed to modify the cognitive biases characteristic of a number of psychopathologies such as depression (Micco, Henin, & Hirshfeld-Becker, 2014) and social anxiety (Hoppitt et al, 2014). To confirm that generalisation had occurred, we compared the mean balance points of the conditions where participants responded to the same stimulus set at test, but were trained on the same (congruent) or a different (incongruent) stimulus set.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
