Cognitive biases in attention, interpretation and less consistently memory have been observed in individuals with chronic pain and play a critical role in the onset and maintenance of chronic pain. Despite operating in combination cognitive biases are typically explored in isolation.
Aim:
The primary aim of this study was to explore attentional, interpretation and memory biases and their interrelationship in individuals with chronic headache.
Methods:
Twenty-eight participants with chronic headache and 34 healthy controls completed paradigms assessing attentional, interpretation and memory biases with ambiguous sensory-pain and neutral words.
Results:
Individuals with chronic pain showed significantly greater pain-related attentional and interpretation biases relative to controls, with no differences in memory bias. No significant correlation was found between any of the three forms of cognitive bias assessed.
Discussion and conclusion:
The clinical implications of cognitive biases in individuals with chronic pain remain to be fully explored, although one avenue for future research would be specific investigation of the implications of biased interpretations considering the consistency of results found across the literature for this form of bias.
CrombezGVan RyckeghemDEcclestonCVan DammeS. Attentional bias to pain-related information: a meta-analysis. Pain2013; 154(4): 497-510.
2.
SchothDEDelgado NunesVLiossiC. Attentional bias towards pain-related information in chronic pain; a meta-analysis of visual-probe investigations. Clin Psychol Rev. 2012; 32(1): 13-25.
3.
SchothDELiossiC.Biased interpretation of ambiguous information in patients with chronic pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of current studies. Health Psychol2016; 35(9): 944–956.
4.
SchothDEParryLLiossiC.Combined cognitive biases for pain and disability information in individuals with chronic headache: a preliminary investigation. J Health Psychol. Epub ahead of print 1 August 2016. DOI: 10.1177/1359105316664136.
5.
SerbicDPincusT.Diagnostic uncertainty and recall bias in chronic low back pain. Pain2014; 155(8): 1540–1546.
6.
ToddJSharpeLJohnsonAet al. Towards a new model of attentional biases in the development, maintenance, and management of pain. Pain2015; 156(9): 5189–5600.
7.
HirschCRClarkDMMathewsA.Imagery and interpretations in social phobia: support for the combined cognitive biases hypothesis. Behav Ther2006; 37(3): 223–236.
EveraertJTierensMUziebloKet al. The indirect effect of attention bias on memory via interpretation bias: evidence for the combined cognitive bias hypothesis in subclinical depression. Cogn Emot2013; 27(8): 1450–1459.
10.
BradleyBPMoggKFallaSJet al. Attentional bias for threatening facial expressions in anxiety: manipulation of stimulus duration. Cogn Emot1998; 12(6): 737–753.
11.
LiossiCSchothDEGodwinHJet al. Using eye movements to investigate selective attention in chronic daily headache. Pain2014; 155(3): 503–510.
12.
SchothDEGodwinHJLiversedgeSPet al. Eye movements during visual search for emotional faces in individuals with chronic headache. Eur J Pain2015; 19(5): 722–732.
13.
SchothDELiossiC.Specificity and time-course of attentional bias in chronic headache: a visual-probe investigation. Clin J Pain2013; 29(7): 583–590.
MelzackR.The McGill pain questionnaire: major properties and scoring methods. Pain1975; 1(3): 277–299.
17.
CleelandCSRyanKM.Pain assessment: global use of the brief pain inventory. Ann Acad Med1994; 23: 129–138.
18.
StewartWFLiptonRBDowsonAJet al. Development and testing of the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) Questionnaire to assess headache-related disability. Neurology2001; 56: S20–S28.
19.
DruryDA.Homographs and pseudo-homographs. Word Ways J Recreat Linguis1969; 2(3): 146–154.
20.
NelsonDLMcEvoyCLSchreiberTA.The University of South Florida free association, rhyme, and word fragment norms. Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput2004; 36(3): 402–407.
21.
WilsonM.MRC psycholinguistic database: machine-usable dictionary, version 2.00. Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput1988; 20(1): 6–10.
22.
MacLeodCMathewsATataP.Attentional bias in emotional disorders. J Abnorm Psychol1986; 95(1): 15–20.
23.
SchothDELiossiC.Attentional bias towards pictorial representations of pain in individuals with chronic headache. Clin J Pain2010; 26(3): 244–250.
24.
LiossiCSchothDEBradleyBPet al. Time course of attentional bias for pain-related cues in chronic daily headache sufferers. Eur J Pain2009; 13(9): 963–969.
25.
SchothDELiossiC.A systematic review of experimental paradigms for exploring biased interpretation of ambiguous information with emotional and neutral associations. Front Psychol2017; 8: 171.
26.
TaghaviMRMoradiARNeshat-DoostHTet al. Interpretation of ambiguous emotional information in clinically anxious children and adolescents. Cogn Emot2000; 14(6): 809–822.
LiossiCSchothDE.Attention toward interpersonal stimuli in individuals with and without chronic daily headache. J Neurol Neurosurg2016; 3(3): 1–7.
31.
PincusTPearceSMcClellandAet al. Interpretation bias in responses to ambiguous cues in pain patients. J Psychosom Res1994; 38(4): 347–353.
32.
PincusTPearceSPerrottA.Pain patients’ bias in the interpretation of ambiguous homophones. Br J Med Psychol1996; 69(3): 259–266.
33.
KarimiZPilenkoAHeldSMet al. Recall bias in patients with chronic low back pain: individual pain response patterns are more important than pain itself!Int J Behav Med2016; 23(1): 12–20.
34.
CummingG.Understanding the new statistics: effect sizes, confidence intervals, and meta-analysis. New York: Routledge, 2012.
35.
EfronB.Better bootstrap confidence intervals. J Am Stat Assoc1987; 82(397): 171–185.
36.
MillerGAChapmanJP.Misunderstanding analysis of covariance. J Abnorm Psychol2001; 110(1): 40–48.
37.
FieldA.Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. London: SAGE, 2013.
38.
LiossiCWhitePSchothDE.Time-course of attentional bias for threat-related cues in patients with chronic daily headache–tension type: evidence for the role of anger. Eur J Pain2011; 15(1): 92–98.
39.
DearBFSharpeLNicholasMet al. Pain-related attentional biases: the importance of the personal relevance and ecological validity of stimuli. J Pain2011; 12(6): 625–632.
40.
BradleyMMLangPJ.Measuring emotion: the self-assessment manikin and the semantic differential. J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry1994; 25: 49–59.
41.
EdwardsLCPearceSA.Word completion in chronic pain: evidence for schematic representation of pain?J Abnorm Psychol1994; 103(2): 379–382.
42.
GriffithJMcLeanMPearceSA.Information processing across three different chronic pain groups. In: Proceedings of the abstracts of 8th world congress on pain, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 17–22 August 1996, p. 75. Seattle, WA: International Association for the Study of Pain.
43.
McKellarJDClarkMEShrinerJ.The cognitive specificity of associative responses in patients with chronic pain. Br J Clin Psychol2003; 42(1): 27–39.
44.
KhatibiASharpeLJafariHet al. Interpretation biases in chronic pain patients: an incidental learning task. Eur J Pain2015; 19(8): 1139–1147.
45.
EcclestonCCrombezG.Pain demands attention: a cognitive-affective model of the interruptive function of pain. Psychol Bull1999; 125(3): 356–366.
46.
AsmundsonGJGVlaeyenJWSCrombezG.Understanding and treating fear of pain. New York: Oxford University Press, 2004.
47.
JonesEBSharpeL.The effect of Cognitive Bias Modification for Interpretation (CBM-I) on avoidance of pain during an acute experimental pain task. Pain2014; 155(8): 1569–1576.
48.
HallionLSRuscioAM.A meta-analysis of the effect of cognitive bias modification on anxiety and depression. Psychol Bull2011; 137(6): 940–945.
49.
MacLeodCMathewsA.Cognitive bias modification approaches to anxiety. Annu Rev Clin Psychol2012; 8: 189–217.
50.
KhatibiASchrootenMGVancleefLMet al. An experimental examination of catastrophizing-related interpretation bias for ambiguous facial expressions of pain using an incidental learning task. Front Psychol2014; 5: 1002.
51.
SchothDERadhakrishnanKLiossiC. A systematic review with subset meta-analysis of studies exploring memory recall biases for pain-related information in adults with chronic pain, in preparation.
52.
BeckAT.Cognitive therapy and the emotional disorders. New York: American Library, 1976.
53.
PincusTMorleyS.Cognitive-processing bias in chronic pain: a review and integration. Psychol Bull2001; 127(5): 599–617.
54.
ReisbergDHeuerF.Remembering emotional events. In: HertelDRP (ed.) Memory and Emotion. New York: Oxford University Press, 2004.
55.
AdelmanJSEstesZ.Emotion and memory: a recognition advantage for positive and negative words independent of arousal. Cognition2013; 129(3): 530–535.
56.
ChapmanSMartinM.Attention to pain words in irritable bowel syndrome: increased orienting and speeded engagement. Br J Health Psychol2011; 16(1): 47–60.
57.
MartinMChapmanSCE. Cognitive processing in putative functional gastrointestinal disorder: rumination yields orientation to social threat not pain. Eur J Pain2010; 14(2): 207–213.
58.
Van RyckeghemDMVervoortT. Towards an integrative view of cognitive biases in pain. Eur J Pain2016; 20(8): 1201–1202.
59.
LiossiC.Attentional biases in chronic pain: do they exist and does it really matter?Pain2012; 153(1): 9–10.
60.
JonesEBSharpeL.Cognitive bias modification: a review of meta-analyses. J Affect Disord2017; 223: 175–183.
61.
SchothDEGeorgallisTLiossiC.Attentional bias modification in people with chronic pain: a proof of concept study. Cogn Behav Ther2013; 42(3): 233–243.
62.
McGowanNSharpeLRefshaugeKet al. The effect of attentional re-training and threat expectancy in response to acute pain. Pain2009; 142(1): 101–107.
63.
CarletonRNRichterAAAsmundsonGJG. Attention modification in persons with fibromyalgia: a double blind, randomized clinical trial. Cogn Behav Ther2011; 40(4): 279–290.
64.
SharpeLIanielloMDearBFet al. Is there a potential role for attention bias modification in pain patients? Results of 2 randomised, controlled trials. Pain2012; 153(3): 722–731.
65.
AsmundsonGJGWrightKDHadjistavropoulosHD.Hypervigilance and attentional fixedness in chronic musculoskeletal pain: consistency of findings across modified Stroop and dot-probe tasks. J Pain2005; 6(8): 497–506.
66.
FaulFErdfelderELangA-Get al. G*power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav Res Methods2007; 39(2): 175–191.
67.
DearBFSharpeLNicholasMet al. The psychometric properties of the dot-probe paradigm when used in pain-related attentional bias research. J Pain2011; 12: 1247–1254.
68.
SharpeLHaggmanSNicholasMet al. Avoidance of affective pain stimuli predicts chronicity in patients with acute low back pain. Pain2014; 155: 45–52.
69.
SchothDEMaYLiossiC.Exploring attentional bias for real-world, pain-related information in chronic musculoskeletal pain using a novel change detection paradigm. Clin J Pain2015; 31(8): 680–688.
70.
TaylorAMHarrisADVarnavaAet al. Neural responses to a modified Stroop paradigm in patients with complex chronic musculoskeletal pain compared to matched controls: an experimental functional magnetic resonance imaging study. BMC Psychol2016; 4(1): 5.
71.
MurisPLuermanJMerckelbachHet al. Danger is lurking everywhere. The relationship between anxiety and threat perception abnormalities in normal children. J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry2000; 31(2): 123–136.
72.
SussmanTJJinJMohantyA.Top-down and bottom-up factors in threat-related perception and attention in anxiety. Biol Psychol2016; 121: 160–172.
73.
Bar-HaimYLamyDLeePBakermans-KranenburgM-Jvan IJzendoornMH. Threat-related attentional bias in anxious and nonanxious individuals: A meta-analytic study. Psychological Bulletin2007; 133(1): 1-24.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
