Mccaffreyarsenault2108

Objective Hostility is a transdiagnostic phenomenon that can have a profound negative impact on interpersonal functioning and psychopathological severity. Evidence suggests that cognitive bias modification for interpretation bias (CBM-I) potentially reduces hostility. However, stringent efficacy studies in people with clinical levels of hostility are currently lacking. Method The present study investigated the effects of CBM-I in two studies one feasibility study (Study 1) in a mixed clinical-community sample of men (N = 29), and one randomized clinical study (Study 2) in a mixed-gender sample with clinical levels of hostility (N = 135), pre-registered at https//osf.io/r46jn. We expected that CBM-I would relate to a larger increase in benign interpretation bias and larger reductions in hostile interpretation bias, hostility symptoms and traits, and general psychiatric symptoms at post-intervention compared to an active control (AC) condition. We also explored the beneficial carry-over effects of CBM-I on working alliance in subsequent psychotherapy 5 weeks after finishing CBM-I (n = 17). Results Results showed that CBM-I increased benign interpretation bias in both studies and partially reduced hostile interpretation bias in Study 2, but not in Study 1. Findings of Study 2 also showed greater reductions in behavioral (but not self-reported) aggression in CBM-I relative to control, but no condition differences were found in self-report hostility measures and general psychiatric symptoms. Conclusions Overall, we found modest support for CBM-I as an intervention for hostility, with some evidence of its efficacy for hostile interpretation bias and aggression. We discuss study limitations as well as directions for future research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).Objective Psychotherapy for depression is effective for many veterans, but the relationship between number of treatment sessions and symptom outcomes is not well established. The Dose-Effect model predicts that greater psychotherapeutic dose (total sessions) yields greater symptom improvement with each additional session resulting in smaller session-to-session improvement. In contrast, the Good-Enough Level (GEL) model predicts that rate of symptom improvement varies by total psychotherapeutic dose with faster improvement associated with earlier termination. This study compared the dose-effect and GEL model among veterans receiving psychotherapy for depression within the Veterans Health Administration. Method The sample included 13,647 veterans with ≥2 sessions of psychotherapy for depression with associated Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) scores in primary care (n = 7,502) and specialty mental health clinics (n = 6,145) between October 2014 and September 2018. Multilevel longitudinal modeling was used to compare the Dose-Effect and GEL models within each clinic type. Results The GEL model demonstrated greater fit for both clinic types relative to dose-effect models. In both treatment settings, veterans with fewer sessions improved faster than those with more sessions. In primary care clinics, veterans who received 4-8 total sessions achieved similar levels of symptom response. In specialty mental health clinics, increased psychotherapeutic dose was associated with greater treatment response up to 16 sessions. Veterans receiving 20 sessions demonstrated minimal treatment response. Conclusions These findings support the GEL model and suggest a flexible approach to determining length of psychotherapy for depression may be useful for optimizing treatment response and allocation of clinical resources. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).Increased predictability effects in older compared to younger adults have been mostly observed in late eye-movement measures during reading. However, it is unclear whether and how these effects may be related to verbal ability, which typically improves with age. Past studies have shown that verbal abilities modulate the predictability effect. Here, we aimed to replicate predictability effects in younger and older adults in a sentence reading paradigm and to investigate how verbal ability modulates the predictability effect. We monitored 26 younger and 27 older adults' eye movements as they read sentences with target words varying in predictability and examined the impact of age and verbal ability, as reflected in vocabulary and print exposure measures. Replicating previous studies, we found that older adults relied more heavily on contextual information in their anticipation of upcoming input in one late measure. In one early measure (first-fixation duration), participants with higher scores in verbal ability showed greater predictability effects, whereas the predictability effect was virtually absent in those with low scores. In one late measure (regression-path duration), age interacted with predictability. However, verbal ability, when included as a covariate in this model, could not account for the age-related increases in predictability effects. Collectively, our findings indicate that verbal ability influences predictability effects in early processing stages, suggesting facilitation of initial word processing and that some aspect of aging other than verbal ability influences predictability effects in late measures. The latter finding most likely reflects a shift toward integrative controlled processes with age. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).Reports an error in "Should I keep studying? Consequences of a decision to stop learning in young and older adults" by Aleksandra Krogulska, Karolina Golik, Krystian Barzykowski, Jennifer Cox, Agata Jakubiak and Elizabeth A. Maylor (Psychology and Aging, 2021[Mar], Vol 36[2], 158-171). In the article (https// doi.org/10.1037/pag0000594), there was a typographical error in the grant number awarded to Aleksandra Krogulska. LCL161 mouse The correct grant number is UMO-2016/21/N/HS6/02953. The online version of this article has been corrected. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2021-24143-001.) In situations of cognitive overload, the role of a metacognitive decision to stop learning is of utmost importance. We investigated how young and older adults decide to stop learning as a strategy for maximizing memory performance when they face to-be-learned material exceeding their memory capability. People may decide to stop learning for two main reasons they experience a growing feeling of disfluency as a learning episode progresses and/or they perceive such a decision to be beneficial for future memory performance.