TY - JOUR
T1 - Cognitive bias modification and cognitive control training in addiction and related psychopathology:
T2 - mechanisms, clinical perspectives and ways forward
AU - Wiers, R.W.
AU - Gladwin, T.E.
AU - Hofmann, W.
AU - Salemink, E.
AU - Ridderinkhof, K.R.
PY - 2013
Y1 - 2013
N2 - The past decade has witnessed a surge in research on training paradigms aimed at directly influencing cognitive processes in addiction and other psychopathology. Broadly, two avenues have been explored: In the first, the aim was to change maladaptive cognitive motivational biases (cognitive bias modification); in the second, the aim was to increase general control processes (e.g., working memory capacity). These approaches are consistent with a dual-process perspective in which psychopathology is related to a combination of disorder-specific impulsive processes and weak general abilities to control these impulses in view of reflective longer-term considerations. After reviewing the evidence for dual-process models in addiction, we discuss a number of critical issues, along with suggestions for further research. We argue that theoretical advancement, along with a better understanding of the underlying neurocognitive processes, is crucial for adequately responding to recent criticisms on dual-process models and for optimizing training paradigms for use in clinical practice.
AB - The past decade has witnessed a surge in research on training paradigms aimed at directly influencing cognitive processes in addiction and other psychopathology. Broadly, two avenues have been explored: In the first, the aim was to change maladaptive cognitive motivational biases (cognitive bias modification); in the second, the aim was to increase general control processes (e.g., working memory capacity). These approaches are consistent with a dual-process perspective in which psychopathology is related to a combination of disorder-specific impulsive processes and weak general abilities to control these impulses in view of reflective longer-term considerations. After reviewing the evidence for dual-process models in addiction, we discuss a number of critical issues, along with suggestions for further research. We argue that theoretical advancement, along with a better understanding of the underlying neurocognitive processes, is crucial for adequately responding to recent criticisms on dual-process models and for optimizing training paradigms for use in clinical practice.
U2 - 10.1177/2167702612466547
DO - 10.1177/2167702612466547
M3 - Article
SN - 2167-7026
VL - 1
SP - 192
EP - 212
JO - Clinical Psychological Science
JF - Clinical Psychological Science
IS - 2
ER -