Search

Purpose: The present study explored whether people with psoriasis display an attentional bias towards disease-related threat words and whether this bias occurs relatively early during the phase of stimulus disengagement, or during a later maintained attention phase dominated by controlled strategic processes. We also explored the degree to which attentional bias is dependent on the emotional valence of control words., Methods: Individuals with psoriasis and matched controls took part in 4 online experiments. Participants completed a spatial cueing paradigm using disease-related threat words and control words as cues, in order to obtain reaction time estimates of attentional bias., Results: We did not observe evidence for attentional bias when control words were matched with threat words for emotional valence, regardless of whether processing time for the cues was limited (Experiment 1: SOA = 250 ms) or extended (Experiment 2: SOA = 1050 ms). We also did not observe evidence for attentional bias when control words of positive valence were used, but processing time was limited (Experiment 3). An attentional bias was only observed (p = .012, Cohen's d = .37) when sufficient processing time was available and positively-valanced control words were used (Experiment 4)., Conclusion: Rather than showing large and generalized AB effects as predicted by previous accounts, our results tentatively suggest that AB in psoriasis is restricted to situations where participants have ample processing time and threat words are easily distinguishable from control words on the basis of emotional valence. The pattern of results suggests that attentional bias in psoriasis is best characterized as a relatively slow strategic process., (© 2023 British Psychological Society.)

Rapidly attending towards potentially harmful stimuli to prevent possible damage to the body is a critical component of adaptive behavior. Research suggests that individuals display an attentional bias, i.e., preferential allocation of attention, for consciously perceived bodily sensations that signal potential threat, like itch or pain. Evidence is not yet clear whether an attentional bias also exists for stimuli that have been presented for such a short duration that they do not enter the stream of consciousness. This study investigated whether a preconscious attentional bias towards itch-related pictures exists in 127 healthy participants and whether this can be influenced by priming with mild itch-related stimuli compared to control stimuli. Mild itch was induced with von Frey monofilaments and scratching sounds, while control stimuli where of matched modalities but neutral. Attentional bias was measured with a subliminal pictorial dot-probe task. Moreover, we investigated how attentional inhibition of irrelevant information and the ability to switch between different tasks, i.e., cognitive flexibility, contribute to the emergence of an attentional bias. Attentional inhibition was measured with a Flanker paradigm and cognitive flexibility was measured with a cued-switching paradigm. Contrary to our expectations, results showed that participants attention was not biased towards the itch-related pictures, in facts, attention was significantly drawn towards the neutral pictures. In addition, no effect of the itch-related priming was observed. Finally, this effect was not influenced by participants' attentional inhibition and cognitive flexibility. Therefore, we have no evidence for a preconscious attentional bias towards itch stimuli. The role of preconscious attentional bias in patients with chronic itch should be investigated in future studies., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Attention is known to modulate itch intensity. In contrast, the reverse relationship, i.e. the degree to which the presence of an acute itch affects attention, is currently not well understood. The aims of this study were to investigate whether acute itch induces an attentional bias towards or away from visual itch-related stimuli, and if so, whether it occurs in the early or later stages of processing. A volunteer sample of 60 healthy individuals were subjected to a skin prick (either histamine or placebo), followed by completion of a spatial cueing paradigm using itch-related and neutral words as cues, in order to obtain reaction time estimates of attentional bias. The results suggest that experience of acute itch induces attentional avoidance of visual itch threats. This attentional avoidance occurs at a later processing stage in the form of facilitated disengagement of attention from itch and/or delayed disengagement from neutral information. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Itch and pain are important attention-demanding sensations that allow adaptive responses to potential bodily harm. An attentional bias towards itch and pain stimuli, i.e. preferential attention allocation towards itch- and pain-related information, has been found in healthy, as well as in patient groups. However, it remains unclear whether attentional bias for itch and pain differs from a general bias towards negative information. Therefore, this study investigated attentional bias towards itch and pain in 70 itch- and pain-free individuals. In an attention task, itch- and pain-related stimuli, as well as negative stimuli, were presented alongside neutral stimuli. The results did not indicate an attentional bias towards itch-, pain-, and negative visual information. This finding suggests that people without itch and pain symptoms do not prioritize itch- and pain-related information above neutral information. Future research should investigate whether attention towards itch- and pain-related information might be biased in patients with chronic itch and pain. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Stigmatization is common in people with chronic skin conditions and may also affect their significant others (SOs). The fast and implicit processing of stigmatization-related stimuli has received little attention in these populations; however, such knowledge may offer indications for new treatment methods. This study aimed to investigate implicit processing of stigmatization-related stimuli in people with skin conditions and their SOs. Method: A modified Stroop task and 2 approach-avoidance tasks were administered to participants with chronic skin conditions (alopecia: n = 50 and psoriasis: n = 50); their significant others (alopecia SOs: n = 47 and psoriasis SOs: n = 50); and controls (n = 50). The aim was to examine attentional and behavioral biases toward disease-related and social threat-related stigmatization stimuli. Results: An attentional bias to disease-related stimuli was found in participants with alopecia and their SOs, compared with controls (p < .001). This effect was not found for participants with psoriasis and their SOs. Increased behavioral avoidance of disgusted faces was found in participants with psoriasis and their SOs, compared with controls (p = .047). This effect was not found in participants with alopecia and their SOs. Conclusions: These results provide support for the idea that individuals with skin conditions and their SOs are characterized by a stigmatization-related stimulus bias regarding implicit cognitive and behavioral reactions, in comparison to healthy individuals. Furthermore, preliminary results suggest that these processes may differ across skin conditions, with people with psoriasis being more affected by social reactions (i.e., disgusted faces) and people with alopecia by disease-related cues possibly related to internalized self-stigma. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]