Skip to main content
Log in

Positive Thinking is Not Adaptive Thinking: A Cognitive-Behavioral Take on Interpretation Bias Modification for Social Anxiety

  • Published:
Journal of Rational-Emotive & Cognitive-Behavior Therapy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Interpretation biases are a core feature of social anxiety. Used to automatically train positive interpretation biases, the existing versions of Cognitive Bias Modification for Interpretation (CBM-I) render mixed results. The current study presents the development and testing of a one-session novel adaptation of CBM-I for social anxiety that provides an adaptive instead of a positive meaning to socially loaded situations. Informed by Rational-Emotive Behavior Therapy and latest theoretical upgrades, we argue that biases exist on a continuum from adaptive to maladaptive and defining them by valence may fuel unrealistic positive illusions. A hundred forty volunteers with high social anxiety were randomized to the CBM-I or to the sham-training condition. Baseline, post-training, and during impromptu speech assessments of self-reported anxiety were made, while adaptive interpretation bias was measured at baseline and post-training. First, near-transfer effects in favor of the CBM-I group were found. Second, no far-transfer effects were found regarding the anxiety experienced during the speech. Third, a main finding was that changes in interpretation bias fully mediated training effects on anxiety. To our knowledge, this is the first CBM-I study to evidence that experimentally induced changes in interpretation mediate changes in anxiety. The therapeutic potential of this new adaptation of CBM-I requires testing in clinical samples.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Not all traditional CBM-I vignettes are radically dichotomous in their positive–negative renditions of interpretation biases.

References

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ioana R. Podina.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Human and Animal Rights

No animal studies were carried out by the authors for this article.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Podina, I.R., Cosmoiu, A., Rusu, P. et al. Positive Thinking is Not Adaptive Thinking: A Cognitive-Behavioral Take on Interpretation Bias Modification for Social Anxiety. J Rat-Emo Cognitive-Behav Ther 38, 424–444 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10942-020-00344-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10942-020-00344-5

Keywords

Navigation