↓ Skip to main content

Associations between childhood maltreatment and emotion processing biases in major depression: results from a dot-probe task

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Psychiatry, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
187 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Associations between childhood maltreatment and emotion processing biases in major depression: results from a dot-probe task
Published in
BMC Psychiatry, June 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12888-015-0501-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vivien Günther, Udo Dannlowski, Anette Kersting, Thomas Suslow

Abstract

Childhood maltreatment is considered an important risk factor for the development of major depression. Research indicates an association between childhood adversity and altered emotion processing. Depression is characterized by mood-congruent cognitive biases, which play a crucial role in symptom persistence and recurrence. However, whether attentional biases in adult major depression are associated with experienced childhood neglect or abuse remains unclear. A sample of 45 patients suffering from major depression were recruited to examine correlations between maltreatment experienced during childhood and attentional biases to sad and happy facial expressions. Attention allocation was assessed using the dot-probe task and a history of childhood maltreatment was measured by means of the 25-item Childhood Trauma Questionnaire (CTQ). Our results indicate an association between childhood maltreatment and sustained attention toward sad facial expressions. This relationship was not confounded by severity of symptoms, age, verbal intelligence or more recent stressful experiences. Our findings confirm the hypothesis that a mood-congruent bias in emotion processing observed in major depression is related to early traumatic experiences.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 187 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Unknown 184 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 33 18%
Student > Master 26 14%
Student > Bachelor 23 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 19 10%
Researcher 16 9%
Other 26 14%
Unknown 44 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 86 46%
Neuroscience 12 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 6%
Social Sciences 6 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 3%
Other 9 5%
Unknown 57 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 June 2015.
All research outputs
#17,761,927
of 22,811,321 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychiatry
#3,672
of 4,690 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#179,765
of 266,605 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychiatry
#58
of 74 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,811,321 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,690 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.8. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 266,605 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 74 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.