19
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The CogBIAS longitudinal study protocol: cognitive and genetic factors influencing psychological functioning in adolescence

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Optimal psychological development is dependent upon a complex interplay between individual and situational factors. Investigating the development of these factors in adolescence will help to improve understanding of emotional vulnerability and resilience. The CogBIAS longitudinal study (CogBIAS-L-S) aims to combine cognitive and genetic approaches to investigate risk and protective factors associated with the development of mood and impulsivity-related outcomes in an adolescent sample.

          Methods

          CogBIAS-L-S is a three-wave longitudinal study of typically developing adolescents conducted over 4 years, with data collection at age 12, 14 and 16. At each wave participants will undergo multiple assessments including a range of selective cognitive processing tasks (e.g. attention bias, interpretation bias, memory bias) and psychological self-report measures (e.g. anxiety, depression, resilience). Saliva samples will also be collected at the baseline assessment for genetic analyses. Multilevel statistical analyses will be performed to investigate the developmental trajectory of cognitive biases on psychological functioning, as well as the influence of genetic moderation on these relationships.

          Discussion

          CogBIAS-L-S represents the first longitudinal study to assess multiple cognitive biases across adolescent development and the largest study of its kind to collect genetic data. It therefore provides a unique opportunity to understand how genes and the environment influence the development and maintenance of cognitive biases and provide insight into risk and protective factors that may be key targets for intervention.

          Related collections

          Most cited references69

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Development of a new resilience scale: the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC).

          Resilience may be viewed as a measure of stress coping ability and, as such, could be an important target of treatment in anxiety, depression, and stress reactions. We describe a new rating scale to assess resilience. The Connor-Davidson Resilience scale (CD-RISC) comprises of 25 items, each rated on a 5-point scale (0-4), with higher scores reflecting greater resilience. The scale was administered to subjects in the following groups: community sample, primary care outpatients, general psychiatric outpatients, clinical trial of generalized anxiety disorder, and two clinical trials of PTSD. The reliability, validity, and factor analytic structure of the scale were evaluated, and reference scores for study samples were calculated. Sensitivity to treatment effects was examined in subjects from the PTSD clinical trials. The scale demonstrated good psychometric properties and factor analysis yielded five factors. A repeated measures ANOVA showed that an increase in CD-RISC score was associated with greater improvement during treatment. Improvement in CD-RISC score was noted in proportion to overall clinical global improvement, with greatest increase noted in subjects with the highest global improvement and deterioration in CD-RISC score in those with minimal or no global improvement. The CD-RISC has sound psychometric properties and distinguishes between those with greater and lesser resilience. The scale demonstrates that resilience is modifiable and can improve with treatment, with greater improvement corresponding to higher levels of global improvement. Copyright 2003 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Attentional bias in emotional disorders.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Cognition and depression: current status and future directions.

              Cognitive theories of depression posit that people's thoughts, inferences, attitudes, and interpretations, and the way in which they attend to and recall information, can increase their risk for depression. Three mechanisms have been implicated in the relation between biased cognitive processing and the dysregulation of emotion in depression: inhibitory processes and deficits in working memory, ruminative responses to negative mood states and negative life events, and the inability to use positive and rewarding stimuli to regulate negative mood. In this review, we present a contemporary characterization of depressive cognition and discuss how different cognitive processes are related not only to each other, but also to emotion dysregulation, the hallmark feature of depression. We conclude that depression is characterized by increased elaboration of negative information, by difficulties disengaging from negative material, and by deficits in cognitive control when processing negative information. We discuss treatment implications of these conclusions and argue that the study of cognitive aspects of depression must be broadened by investigating neural and genetic factors that are related to cognitive dysfunction in this disorder. Such integrative investigations should help us gain a more comprehensive understanding of how cognitive and biological factors interact to affect the onset, maintenance, and course of depression.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                01865 271305 , charlotte.booth@psy.ox.ac.uk
                annabel.songco@psy.ox.ac.uk
                sam.parsons@psy.ox.ac.uk
                lcheath@stanford.edu
                j.p.vincent@qmul.ac.uk
                r.keers@qmul.ac.uk
                elaine.fox@psy.ox.ac.uk
                Journal
                BMC Psychol
                BMC Psychol
                BMC Psychology
                BioMed Central (London )
                2050-7283
                29 December 2017
                29 December 2017
                2017
                : 5
                : 41
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1936 8948, GRID grid.4991.5, Department of Experimental Psychology, , University of Oxford, ; New Richards Building, Oxford, Headington OX3 7LG UK
                [2 ]ISNI 0000000419368956, GRID grid.168010.e, Department of Anaesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, , Stanford University, ; Stanford, CA USA
                [3 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2171 1133, GRID grid.4868.2, Department of Biological and Experimental Psychology, , Queen Mary University London, ; London, UK
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7576-4070
                Article
                210
                10.1186/s40359-017-0210-3
                5747087
                29284537
                6bc6a3ee-34e7-41ab-8e2c-46ec584110f7
                © The Author(s). 2017

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 1 September 2017
                : 12 December 2017
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000781, European Research Council;
                Award ID: 324176
                Award Recipient :
                Categories
                Study Protocol
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2017

                cognitive bias,genetic variation,polygenic sensitivity scores,longitudinal,adolescents,psychopathology,anxiety,depression,impulsivity

                Comments

                Comment on this article