تدوین و رواسازی آزمون جستجوی دیداری برای سنجش سوگیری توجه به تصاویر دلبستگی | ||
| فصلنامه روانشناسی کاربردی | ||
| مقاله 5، دوره 18، شماره 4 - شماره پیاپی 72، 1403، صفحه 105-123 اصل مقاله (552.04 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.48308/apsy.2024.236923.1704 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| سالومه قاسمی منصف1؛ معصومه آزموده* 2؛ جواد مصرآبادی3؛ مرضیه علیوندی وفا4 | ||
| 1دانشجوی دکتری روانشناسی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد تبریز، ایران. | ||
| 2استادیار روانشناسی، دانشکده علوم انسانی و تربیتی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد تبریز، ایران. | ||
| 3گروه روانشناسی، دانشکده روانشناسی، دانشگاه شهید مدنی آذربایجان، تبریز، ایران. | ||
| 4دانشیار روانشناسی، دانشکده علوم انسانی و تربیتی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد تبریز، ایران. | ||
| 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 متشکل 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 (05/0>p). همبستگی میان ابعاد دلبستگی (اضطراب و اجتناب) و نمره سوگیری توجه منفی و معنادار بود (05/0>p). در ارتباط با روایی تمییزی، آزمون از توان مناسب جهت افتراق افراد ایمن از ناایمنها (اضطرابی و اجتنابی) برخوردار بود (001/0<p) بدین صورت که دو گروه ناایمن رویگردانی بیشتری از تصاویر دلبستگی داشتند. آزمون مورد نظر از پایایی بازآزمایی متوسط (بین 46/0 تا 57/0) و همسانی درونی نسبتا بالایی (63/0 تا 77/0) برخوردار بود. 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 | ||
| دلبستگی؛ سوگیری توجه؛ جستجوی دیداری؛ تصاویر هیجانی؛ رواسازی | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Development and Validation of Visual Search Test to Measure Attentional Bias Towards Attachment-Related Images | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Saloomeh Ghasemi Monsef1؛ Masoumeh Azmoodeh2؛ Javad Mesrabadi3؛ Marzieh Alivandi Vafa4 | ||
| 1Ph.D. Student in Psychology, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran. | ||
| 2Assistant Professor, Faculty of Humanities and Educational Sciences, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran. | ||
| 3Professor, Azarbaijan Shahid Madani University, Tabriz, Iran. | ||
| 44. Associate Professor, Faculty of Humanities and Educational Sciences, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran. | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Aim: Investigating the cognitive and neurophysiological foundations of attachment requires assessing its automatic dimensions. This study aimed to develop and validate a visual search test to measure attentional bias toward attachment-related images. Method: This descriptive study included a sample of 258 students (153 women) with an average age of 21.3, selected through convenience sampling. Participants completed a computerized visual search test, the Revised Experiences in Close Relationships Scale (Fraley et al., 2000), the Adult Attachment Questionnaire (Hazan & Shaver, 1987), and the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale (Lovibond & Lovibond, 2002). Data were analyzed using Pearson's correlation coefficient and mixed analysis of variance. Results: Regarding convergent validity, attentional bias showed a positive and significant relationship with anxiety (p < 0.05). Additionally, attachment dimensions (anxiety and avoidance) were negatively correlated with attentional bias (p < 0.05). In terms of discriminant validity, the test effectively distinguished securely attached individuals from insecure groups (p < 0.001), with insecure groups displaying greater avoidance of attachment-related images. Reliability analysis indicated that the visual search test had moderate test-retest reliability (0.46 to 0.57) and relatively high internal consistency (0.63 to 0.77). Conclusion: The findings support the validity and reliability of the visual search test for measuring attachment-related attentional bias. These results encourage researchers to explore the automatic dimensions of attachment rather than relying solely on self-report measures. | ||
| 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] | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 14,270 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 3,770 |
||