Attentional bias to pain-relevant body locations: New methods,new challenges |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. Laboratory of Psychophysics, Brain Mind Institute, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Switzerland;2. Department of Cognitive Psychology, University of Finance and Management, Warsaw, Poland;3. Cognitive Psychology and Ergonomics, University of Twente, The Netherlands;1. Psychology Department, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy;2. Santa Lucia Foundation, Scientific Institute for Research, Hospitalization and Health Care, Rome, Italy;1. Graduate School of Letters, Kyoto University, Sakyo, Kyoto 6068501, Japan;2. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science, Kyoto University, Sakyo, Kyoto 6068501, Japan;1. Department of Experimental-Clinical and Health Psychology, Ghent University, Henri Dunantlaan 2, 9000 Ghent, Belgium;2. Centre for Pain Research, University of Bath, UK;3. Institute of Neuroscience, Université catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium;4. Psychological Sciences Research Institute, Université catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium;1. Behavioural Science Institute, Radboud University Nijmegen, the Netherlands;2. Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University Nijmegen, the Netherlands;3. University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam School of Economics (CREED) and Tinbergen Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands;4. Center for Adaptive Rationality, Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin, Germany;5. University of Amsterdam, Department of Developmental Psychology, Amsterdam, the Netherlands |
| |
| Abstract: | In a recent issue of Consciousness and Cognition, Filbrich, Torta, Vanderclausen, Azanon, and Legrain (2016) commented on a paper in which we used a tactile Temporal Order Judgment (TOJ) task to show that expecting pain on a specific body location biased attention to that location (Vanden Bulcke, Crombez, Durnez, & Van Damme, 2015). Their main criticism is that the effects are likely to reflect response bias rather than genuine attentional bias. We agree that the TOJ task used may be susceptible to response bias, and welcome the authors’ methodological suggestions to control for such bias. However, we feel that certain aspects of our work are misrepresented in their paper. Most importantly, we contest their argument that our instructions made the threat location task-relevant, thereby increasing risk of response bias. Further, we reply to other methodological and theoretical issues raised by these authors. |
| |
| Keywords: | Attention Temporal Order Judgment Experimental pain Bodily threat |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
