Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: JMIR mHealth and uHealth

Date Submitted: Sep 19, 2019
Date Accepted: Oct 17, 2019

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

Making Sense of Negative Findings from Mobile Attention Bias Modification Interventions for Individuals with Addictive Disorders: Quantitative Feasibility Study

Zhang M, Ying J, Amron SB, Mahreen Z, Guo S, Fung DS, Smith HE

Making Sense of Negative Findings from Mobile Attention Bias Modification Interventions for Individuals with Addictive Disorders: Quantitative Feasibility Study

JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2019;7(11):e16325

DOI: 10.2196/16325

PMID: 31714248

PMCID: 6880231

Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.

Mobile Attention Bias Modification Intervention for Individuals with Addictive Disorders: Making Sense of Negative Findings

  • Melvyn Zhang; 
  • Jiangbo Ying; 
  • Syidda B Amron; 
  • Zaakira Mahreen; 
  • Song Guo; 
  • Daniel SS Fung; 
  • Helen E Smith

ABSTRACT

Abstract Background The advances in experimental psychology have led to a better understanding of unconscious, automatic processes that result in individuals relapsing into their substance-using habits. Whilst some reviews have demonstrated the effectiveness of bias retraining of these unconscious biases, there have been other reviews that have highlighted that bias retraining is not always effective. Other studies have revealed there being no baseline biases amongst some participants. An examination of mobile bias retraining interventions also revealed mixed results, with some reporting effectiveness and others null findings. Zhang et al. (2019) in their recent study revealed that 53% of participants have had no baseline biases, and 21% of those with positive baseline biases did not have a positive change in magnitude following intervention. Objective The aim of this article was to explore potential variables (demographic and clinical) that could account for the negative baseline biases in Zhang et al. (2019)’s prior study, and to discuss some of the factors that could account for the absence of baseline biases. We would also explore potential reasons for there to be no reduction in the magnitude of attentional biases, amongst individuals with baseline biases. Methods The methods for this study have been previously published as a study protocol (Zhang et al. (2018)) and in Zhang’s published feasibility and acceptability study. Results In our study, 53% of individuals did not present with baseline attentional biases, and amongst those with positive baseline biases, 21% (or three participants out of 14 participants) did not have a reduction in the overall magnitude of attentional biases. Chi-square analyses undertaken to compare the demographic characteristics of participants with and without baseline biases did not reveal any significant findings. However, with respect to clinical characteristics, those who have had positive baseline biases have experimented with more substances. Conclusions Our study is one of the first studies to have explored negative findings in attention bias modification interventions for individuals with addictive disorders. We postulate that being several factors that could account for the absence of baseline biases; and there being no changes following bias retraining. Future research ought to take into consideration these factors.


 Citation

Please cite as:

Zhang M, Ying J, Amron SB, Mahreen Z, Guo S, Fung DS, Smith HE

Making Sense of Negative Findings from Mobile Attention Bias Modification Interventions for Individuals with Addictive Disorders: Quantitative Feasibility Study

JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2019;7(11):e16325

DOI: 10.2196/16325

PMID: 31714248

PMCID: 6880231

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.