تدوین و رواسازی آزمون جستجوی دیداری برای سنجش سوگیری توجه به تصاویر دلبستگی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری روان‌شناسی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد تبریز، ایران.

2 استادیار روانشناسی، دانشکده علوم انسانی و تربیتی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد تبریز، ایران.

3 گروه روانشناسی، دانشکده روانشناسی، دانشگاه شهید مدنی آذربایجان، تبریز، ایران.

4 دانشیار روان‌شناسی، دانشکده علوم انسانی و تربیتی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد تبریز، ایران.

10.48308/apsy.2024.236923.1704

چکیده


هدف: مطالعة زیربنا‌های شناختی و عصبی-فیزیولوژیکی دلبستگی نیازمند سنجش ابعاد خودکار آن است. هدف از پژوهش حاضر تدوین و رواسازی آزمون جستجوی دیداری جهت سنجش سوگیری توجه نسبت به تصاویر مرتبط با دلبستگی بود.
روش: مطالعه حاضر یک مطالعه توصیفی مشتکل از ۲۵۸ دانشجو (۱۵۳ زن) با میانگین سنی ۳۶/۲۱ بود که با روش نمونه‌گیری در دسترس انتخاب و آزمون رایانه‌ای جستجوی دیداری، مقیاس تجدیدنظریافته تجارب مربوط به روابط نزدیک (فریلی و همکاران، ۲۰۰۰)، پرسشنامه دلبستگی بزرگسالان (هازان و شیور، ۱۹۸۷) و مقیاس استرس، اضطراب و افسردگی (لویباند و لویباند، ۲۰۰۲) را تکمیل نمودند. از همبستگی پیرسون و تحلیل واریانس آمیخته برای تجزیه و تحلیل داده‌ها استفاده شد.
یافته‌ها: یافته‌های مربوط به روایی هم‌گرا نشان داد که نمره سوگیری توجه با اضطراب رابطه مثبت و معنادار دارد (۰۵/۰>p). همبستگی میان ابعاد دلبستگی (اضطراب و اجتناب) و نمره سوگیری توجه منفی و معنادار بود (۰۵/۰>p). در ارتباط با روایی تمییزی، آزمون از توان مناسب جهت افتراق افراد ایمن از ناایمنها (اضطرابی و اجتنابی) برخوردار بود (۰۰۱/۰ نتیجه‌گیری: یافته‌های این مطالعه بیانگر روایی و پایایی قابل قبول آزمون جستجوی دیداری جهت سنجش سوگیری توجه به تصاویر دلبستگی بود. این یافته‌ها می‌تواند الهام‌بخش پژوهشگران در تمرکز بر ابعاد خودکار دلبستگی و عدم اتکای صرف بر ابزار‌های پرسشنامه‌ای باشد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

Development and Validation of Visual Search Test to Measure Attentional Bias Towards Attachment-Related Images

نویسندگان [English]

  • Saloomeh Ghasemi Monsef 1
  • Masoumeh Azmoodeh 2
  • Javad Mesrabadi 3
  • Marzieh Alivandi Vafa 4
1 Ph.D. Student in Psychology, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran.
2 Assistant Professor, Faculty of Humanities and Educational Sciences, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran.
3 Professor, Azarbaijan Shahid Madani University, Tabriz, Iran.
4 4. Associate Professor, Faculty of Humanities and Educational Sciences, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran.
چکیده [English]

Aim: Studying the cognitive and neuro-physiological foundations of attachment requires measuring it’s automatic dimensions. The current research aimed to develop and validate a visual search test to measure attention bias toward attachment-related images.
Methods: The present study was a descriptive research. The sample consisted of 258 students (153 women) with an average age of 21.3 selected by convenience sampling. The participants completed a computerized visual search test, the revised scale of experiences related to close relationships (Fraly et al., 2000), the adult attachment questionnaire (Hazan and Shaver, 1987), and the stress, anxiety, and depression scale (Loviband and Loviband, 2002). The data were analyzed by Pearson's correlation coefficient and mixed analysis of variance.
Results: Regarding convergent validity, attentional bias has a positive and significant relationship with anxiety (p<0.05). On the other hand, the attachment dimensions (anxiety and avoidance) and attention bias were negatively related (p<0.05). Concerning discriminative validity, the test had the appropriate power to differentiate securely attached people from the insecure groups (p<0.001) so that the insecure groups had more turning away from attachment images. The reliability results showed that the visual search test has moderate retest reliability (0.46 to 0.57) and relatively high internal consistency (0.63 to 0.77).
Conclusion: The findings showed the acceptable validity and reliability of the visual search test to measure the attachment-related bias. These findings can inspire researchers to focus on the automatic dimensions of attachment and not rely solely on questionnaire tools.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Attachment
  • Attentional bias
  • Visual search
  • Emotional images
  • Validation

مراجع

Beck, A. T., Emery, G., & Greenberg, R. L. (2005). Anxiety disorders and phobias: A cognitive perspective. Basic Books/Hachette Book Group. [link]
Bottonari, K. A., Roberts, J. E., Kelly, M. A., Kashdan, T. B., & Ciesla, J. A. (2007). A prospective investigation of the impact of attachment style on stress generation among clinically depressed individuals. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 45(1), 179-188. [link]
Bowlby, J. (1973). Attachment and loss: Vol. 2. Separation: Anxiety and anger. New York: Basic Books. [link]
Bowlby, J. (1979). The bowlby-ainsworth attachment theory. Behavioral and brain sciences, 2(4), 637-638 [link]
Bowlby, J. (1980). Attachment and Loss. Vol. 3: Loss, Sadness and Depression. New York: Basic Books. [link]
Chavis, J. M., & Kisley, M. A. (2012). Adult attachment and motivated attention to social images: Attachment-based differences in event-related brain potentials to emotional images. Journal of Research in Personality, 46(1), 55-62. [link]
Cisler, J. M., Bacon, A. K., & Williams, N. L. (2009). Phenomenological characteristics of attentional biases towards threat: A critical review. Cognitive therapy and research, 33, 221-234.[link]
Comte, A., Szymanska, M., Monnin, J., Moulin, T., Nezelof, S., Magnin, E., ... & Vulliez-Coady, L. (2024). Neural correlates of distress and comfort in individuals with avoidant, anxious and secure attachment style: an fMRI study. Attachment & Human Development, 1-23. [link[
Crawford, J. R., & Henry, J. D. (2003). The Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS): Normative data and latent structure in a large non‐clinical sample. British journal of clinical psychology, 42(2), 111-131. [link]
Dan, O., & Raz, S. (2012). Adult attachment and emotional processing biases: an event-related potentials (ERPs) study. Biological psychology, 91(2), 212-220. [link]
Dewitte, M., & De Houwer, J. (2008). Adult attachment and attention to positive and negative emotional face expressions. Journal of Research in Personality, 42(2), 498-505. [link]
Dykas, M. J., Woodhouse, S. S., Jones, J. D., & Cassidy, J. (2014). Attachment‐related biases in adolescents’ memory. Child development, 85(6), 2185-2201. [link]
Edelstein, R. S., & Gillath, O. (2008). Avoiding interference: Adult attachment and emotional processing biases. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(2), 171-181. [link]
Fairchild, A. J., & Finney, S. J. (2006). Investigating validity evidence for the experiences in close relationships-revised questionnaire. Educational and Psychological measurement, 66(1), 116-135. [link]
Gander, M., & Buchheim, A. (2015). Attachment classification, psychophysiology and frontal EEG asymmetry across the lifespan: a review. Frontiers in human neuroscience, 9, 79. [link]
Gillath, O., & Karantzas, G. (2019). Attachment security priming: A systematic review. Current opinion in psychology, 25, 86-95. [link]
Hadders-Algra, M. (2022). Human face and gaze perception is highly context specific and involves bottom-up and top-down neural processing. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 132, 304-323. [link]
Hokken, M. J., Krabbendam, E., van der Zee, Y. J., & Kooiker, M. J. (2023). Visual selective attention and visual search performance in children with CVI, ADHD, and Dyslexia: a scoping review. Child Neuropsychology, 29(3), 357-390. [link]
Koster, E. H., Verschuere, B., Crombez, G., & Van Damme, S. (2005). Time-course of attention for threatening pictures in high and low trait anxiety. Behaviour research and therapy, 43(8), 1087-1098. [link]
Lang, P. J., Bradley, M. M., & Cuthbert, B. N. (2005). International affective picture system (IAPS): Affective ratings of pictures and instruction manual. In Technicalm report A-6. University of Florida. [link]
Lathrop, L. M., Davis, I. A., & Kisley, M. A. (2015). Attention allocation to attachment-related and general emotional words: An event-related brain potential investigation of the effects of attachment-style and relationship status. Edorium Journal of Psychology, 1, 22-32. [link]
Liu, Y., Ding, Y., Lu, L., & Chen, X. (2017). Attention bias of avoidant individuals to attachment emotion pictures. Scientific Reports, 7(1), 41631.[link]
Liu, Y., Ding, Y., Lu, L., & Chen, X. (2017). Attention bias of avoidant individuals to attachment emotion pictures. Scientific Reports, 7(1), 41631. [link]
Lovibond, P. F., & Lovibond, S. H. (1995). The structure of negative emotional states: Comparison of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS) with the Beck Depression and Anxiety Inventories. Behaviour research and therapy, 33(3), 335-343. [link]
MacLeod, C., Grafton, B., & Notebaert, L. (2019). Anxiety-linked attentional bias: is it reliable?. Annual review of clinical psychology, 15(1), 529-554. [link]
MacLeod, C., Mathews, A., & Tata, P. (1986). Attentional bias in emotional disorders. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 95(1), 15–20. [link]
Maleki, G., Mazaheri, M. A., & Dehghani, M. (2013). Construction and validation of Dot-Probe test for measurement of selective attention towards attachment related pictures. Journal of Psychology. [link]
Maleki, G., Mazaheri, M. A., Nejati, V., Borhani, K., & Bosmans, G. (2021). The Attachment-related picture set (ARPS): development and validation. Current Psychology, 42(5), 3668-3679. [link]
Mesrabadi, J., Jafariyan, S., & Ostovar, N. (2013). Discriminative and construct validity of meaning in life questionnaire for Iranian students. International Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 7(1), 83-90. [link]
Mikulincer, M. (2008). Adult attachment and affect regulation. Handbook of attachment: theory, research, and clinical applications/Guilford. [link]
Mikulincer, M., Shaver, P. R., & Pereg, D. (2003). Attachment theory and affect regulation: The dynamics, development, and cognitive consequences of attachment-related strategies. Motivation and emotion, 27, 77-102. [link]
Mogg, K., & Bradley, B. P. (2016). Anxiety and attention to threat: Cognitive mechanisms and treatment with attention bias modification. Behaviour research and therapy, 87, 76-108. [link]
Mogg, K., Holmes, A., Garner, M., & Bradley, B. P. (2008). Effects of threat cues on attentional shifting, disengagement and response slowing in anxious individuals. Behaviour research and therapy, 46(5), 656 667. [link]
Nuijs, M. D., Larsen, H., Bögels, S. M., Wiers, R. W., & Salemink, E. (2020). Context matters: The role of subjective arousal during Attentional Bias Modification targeting socially anxious students. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 68, 101545. [link]
Öhman, A., Lundqvist, D., & Esteves, F. (2001). The face in the crowd revisited: a threat advantage with schematic stimuli. Journal of personality and social psychology, 80(3), 381.[link]
Osgood, C. E. (1966). Dimensionality of the semantic space for communication via facial expressions. Scandinavian journal of Psychology, 7(1), 1-30. [link]
Rellecke, J., Palazova, M., Sommer, W., & Schacht, A. (2011). On the automaticity of emotion processing in words and faces: event-related brain potentials evidence from a superficial task. Brain and cognition, 77(1), 23-32. [link]
Rowe, A. C., Gold, E. R., & Carnelley, K. B. (2020). The effectiveness of attachment security priming in improving positive affect and reducing negative affect: A systematic review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(3), 968. [link]
Schmukle, S. C. (2005). Unreliability of the dot probe task. European Journal of Personality, 19, 595–605. [link]
Van Bockstaele, B., Lamens, L., Salemink, E., Wiers, R. W., Bögels, S. M., & Nikolaou, K. (2020). Reliability and validity of measures of attentional bias towards threat in unselected student samples: seek, but will you find?. Cognition and Emotion, 34(2), 217-228. [link]
Van Bockstaele, B., Salemink, E., Bögels, S. M., & Wiers, R. W. (2017). Limited generalisation of changes in attentional bias following attentional bias modification with the visual probe task. Cognition and Emotion, 31, 369–376. [link]
Verhees, M. W., Ceulemans, E., Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., & Bosmans, G. (2021). State attachment variability: Between-and within-person level associations with trait attachment and psychological problems. Brain sciences, 11(10), 1264. [link]
Vuilleumier, P., & Huang, Y. M. (2009). Emotional attention: Uncovering the mechanisms of affective biases in perception. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18(3), 148-152. [link]
Warren, S. L., Bost, K. K., Roisman, G. I., Silton, R. L., Spielberg, J. M., Engels, A. S., ... & Heller, W. (2010). Effects of adult attachment and emotional distractors on brain mechanisms of cognitive control. Psychological science, 21(12), 1818-1826. [link]
Waters, H. S., Waters, T. E., Waters, E., Thompson, R. A., Simpson, J. A., & Berlin, L. J. (2021). From internal working models to script-like attachment representations. 2021). Attachment: The Fundamental Questions, 111-119. [link]
Zilber, A., Goldstein, A., & Mikulincer, M. (2007). Adult attachment orientations and the processing of emotional pictures–ERP correlates. Personality and Individual Differences, 43(7), 1898-1907. [link]

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار