IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i21p7821-d434753.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Challenges When Evaluating Cognitive Bias Modification Interventions for Substance Use Disorder

Author

Listed:
  • Melvyn W. B. Zhang

    (National Addiction Management Service, Institute of Mental Health, Singapore 539747, Singapore)

  • Helen E. Smith

    (Family Medicine and Primary Care, Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University Singapore, Singapore 308232, Singapore)

Abstract

In recent years, advances in experimental psychology have led to a better understanding in automatic, unconscious processes, referred to as attentional and approach biases amongst individuals with substance use disorders. Attentional biases refer to the relatively automatic tendencies for attention to be preferentially allocated towards substance-related cues. Whereas, approach bias refers to the relatively automatic behavioral tendencies of individuals to reach out to substance-related cues in their natural environment. While, several reviews confirm the existence of these biases, and the effectiveness of bias modification, the conduct of cognitive bias modification amongst substance-using individuals is not without its challenges. One of these is that cognitive biases, both attentional and approach biases, are not universally present; and several individual differences factors modulate the magnitude of the biases. Another challenge that investigators faced in their conduct of cognitive bias modification relates to the selection of the appropriate task for bias assessment and modification. Other challenges intrinsic to cognitive bias modification intervention relates to that of participant attrition, much like conventional psychotherapies. Negative findings, of the absence of biases at baseline, or the lack of effectiveness of bias modification have been reported in studies of cognitive bias modification. All these challenges could have an impact on bias assessment and modification. In this perspective paper, we will explore the literature surrounding each of these challenges and discuss potential measures that could be undertaken to mitigate these clinical and research challenges.

Suggested Citation

  • Melvyn W. B. Zhang & Helen E. Smith, 2020. "Challenges When Evaluating Cognitive Bias Modification Interventions for Substance Use Disorder," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-7, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:21:p:7821-:d:434753
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/21/7821/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/21/7821/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Melvyn Weibin Zhang & Jiang Bo Ying & Guo Song & Daniel S. S. Fung & Helen E. Smith, 2018. "Recent Advances in Attention Bias Modification for Substance Addictions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-8, April.
    2. Ioana A Cristea & Robin N Kok & Pim Cuijpers, 2016. "The Effectiveness of Cognitive Bias Modification Interventions for Substance Addictions: A Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(9), pages 1-19, September.
    3. Melvyn Zhang & Daniel S. S. Fung & Helen Smith, 2019. "Variations in the Visual Probe Paradigms for Attention Bias Modification for Substance Use Disorders," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-13, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Doris X.Y. Chia & Melvyn W.B. Zhang, 2020. "A Scoping Review of Cognitive Bias in Internet Addiction and Internet Gaming Disorders," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(1), pages 1-11, January.
    2. J. Nicolás I. Martínez-López & María-Elena Medina-Mora & Rebeca Robles-García & Eduardo Madrigal & Francisco Juárez & Carlos-Alfonso Tovilla-Zarate & Cosette Reyes & Nadja Monroy & Ana Fresán, 2019. "Psychopathic Disorder Subtypes Based on Temperament and Character Differences," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-10, November.
    3. Zhang Melvyn & Aloysius Chow & Ranganath Vallabhajosyula & Daniel SS Fung, 2020. "Emotional Bias Modification in Youths with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD): New Research Vista," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-7, June.
    4. Melvyn W. B. Zhang & Sandor Heng & Syidda B. Amron & Zaakira Mahreen & Guo Song & Daniel S. S. Fung & Helen E. Smith, 2020. "Gamified M-Health Attention Bias Modification Intervention for Individuals with Opioid Use Disorder: Protocol for a Pilot Randomised Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-10, January.
    5. Melvyn Weibin Zhang & Jiang Bo Ying & Guo Song & Daniel S. S. Fung & Helen E. Smith, 2018. "Recent Advances in Attention Bias Modification for Substance Addictions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-8, April.
    6. Melvyn W.B. Zhang & Jiangbo Ying, 2019. "Incorporating Participatory Action Research in Attention Bias Modification Interventions for Addictive Disorders: Perspectives," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-11, March.
    7. Melvyn Zhang & Jiangbo Ying & Tracey Wing & Guo Song & Daniel S. S. Fung & Helen Smith, 2018. "A Systematic Review of Attention Biases in Opioid, Cannabis, Stimulant Use Disorders," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-12, June.
    8. Yi Zhuang Tan & Melvyn W.B. Zhang & Carol C. Choo, 2019. "Perspectives on Modifying Attentional Biases Amongst Individuals with Tobacco Use Disorder Using Technology: A Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(15), pages 1-11, July.
    9. Di Pietro Giorgio & European Commission & IZA, 2022. "Studying abroad and earnings: A meta‐analysis," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(4), pages 1096-1129, September.
    10. Joshua M. Carlson & Madeline Voltz & John Foley & Lisa Gentry & Lin Fang, 2022. "Changing how you look at climate change: attention bias modification increases attention to climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 175(3), pages 1-18, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:21:p:7821-:d:434753. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.