Physical aggression and attentional bias to angry faces: An event related potential study.

This study aimed to identify the neural correlates of aggression-related attentional selectivity to angry faces in physical aggression. Physical aggression in a non-clinical sample of young men (N = 36) was measured using an aggression questionnaire. Visual attentional bias to angry faces was assessed using a dot-probe task during which angry and neutral faces were presented simultaneously, and EEG was recorded. Median split and correlational analyses were conducted to assess the relationship between physical aggression and attentional bias. Behavioural results indicated that higher levels of physical aggression were associated with greater attentional bias to angry faces. ERP results revealed an interaction where males with higher physical aggression had undifferentiated P3 amplitudes to angry and neutral trials, whereas low physical aggression males exhibited greater P3 amplitude to angry than to neutral trials (effect of probe congruency). Increased levels of physical aggression were also significantly correlated with increased P3 amplitude to probes replacing neutral faces, relative to angry faces. It was concluded that the aggressive males selectively attend to angry faces, and that attentional bias is characterized by undifferentiated P3 amplitude. We propose that this results from an inferior ability to downregulate competing angry face distractors when responding to probes replacing neutral faces (as reflected by the P3 response). These findings indicate that attentional bias to angry faces in individuals with higher physical aggression is characterized by a distinctive ERP signature; this could inform the development of therapeutic interventions seeking to reduce aggression.

WITHDRAWN: Physical aggression and attentional bias to angry faces: An event related potential study.

This article has been withdrawn at the request of the authors. The authors have opted to update their article and have resubmitted it to the journal as a new submission. The updated article has now been accepted and can be found here: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2019.146387. The full Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal can be found at https://www.elsevier.com/about/our-business/policies/article-withdrawal.

Obesity and dental caries in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Obesity and dental caries have become increasingly prevalent challenges to public health. Research results into the relationship between obesity and dental caries in children have been mixed and inconclusive. The aim of this review and meta-analysis was to provide evidence to quantify the relationship between obesity and dental caries in children using a systematic approach. METHODS: A systematic search for papers between 1980 and 2010 addressing childhood obesity and dental caries was conducted and a random effects model meta-analysis applied. RESULTS: Fourteen papers met the selection criteria. Overall, a significant relationship between childhood obesity and dental caries (effect size = 0.104, P = 0.049) was found. When analysed by dentition type (primary versus permanent), there was a nonsignificant association of obesity and dental caries in permanent and primary dentitions, yet on accounting only for standardized definitions for assessment of child obesity using body mass index, a strong significant relationship was evident in children with permanent dentitions. Moderating for study country of origin (newly 'industrialized' versus industrialized) showed a significant relationship between obesity and dental caries in children from industrialized but not newly industrialized countries. Cofactors such as age and socioeconomic class were significant moderators. CONCLUSIONS: Future analysis should investigate these confounding variables, helping shape the future of obesity management programmes and oral health interventions, through determining common risk factors.

A comparison of cognitive bias modification for interpretation and computerized cognitive behavior therapy: effects on anxiety, depression, attentional control, and interpretive bias.

OBJECTIVE: Computerized cognitive behavioral therapy (cCBT) and cognitive bias modification for interpretation (CBM-I) both have demonstrated efficacy in alleviating social anxiety, but how they compare with each other has not been investigated. The present study tested the prediction that both interventions would reduce anxiety relative to a no-intervention comparison condition, but CBM-I would be particularly effective at modifying threat-related cognitive bias under high mental load. METHOD: Sixty-three primarily Caucasian adults (mean age = 22.7, SD = 5.87; 68.3% female) with high social anxiety, randomly allocated to 3 groups: CBM-I (n = 21), cCBT (n = 21), and a no-intervention control group (n = 21) provided complete data for analysis. Pre- and postintervention (4 sessions lasting 2 weeks, control participants only attended the pre-post sessions) self-report measures of anxiety, depression, attentional control, and threat-related interpretive bias were completed. In addition, interpretive bias under high versus low cognitive load was measured using the Scrambled Sentences Test. RESULTS: Both CBM-I and cCBT groups reported significantly reduced levels of social anxiety, trait anxiety, and depression and improved attentional control, relative to the control group, with no clear superiority of either active intervention. Although both active conditions reduced negative bias on the Scrambled Sentences Test completed under mental load, CBM-I was significantly more effective at doing so. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that although not differing in therapeutic efficacy, CBM-I and cCBT might differ in the resilience of their effects when under mental load.