A systematic review of the word sentence association paradigm (WSAP).

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The Word Sentence Association Paradigm (WSAP) was originally designed to assess and modify interpretive biases (IB) in socially anxious individuals. Researchers have since modified the WSAP for use across various populations. Despite its widespread use, no studies have systematically reviewed the WSAP to determine its validity and reliability. METHODS: We review variations to the WSAP, populations in which the WSAP has been used, reliability data, and effect sizes across 41 studies published between 2008 and March 2018. RESULTS: Results indicate that the WSAP has been utilized to target 18 disorders and symptoms in adults and children. Modifications include stimulus content, timing parameters, and presentation order of word and sentence pairs. Reported internal consistency and test-retest reliability suggest good to excellent reliability. Medium to large effect sizes were reported when comparing control samples to those with psychopathology and in pre-post comparisons of the modification version of the WSAP. LIMITATIONS: Studies varied regarding which indices of the WSAP were presented and specific task parameters used, making it challenging to compare effects. CONCLUSIONS: The WSAP is a reliable and valid instrument for assessing and modifying interpretive biases with unique characteristics compared with other IB assessment and modification tasks.

Trauma and event centrality: Valence and incorporation into identity influence well-being more than exposure.

Although the association between trauma exposure and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms is well established, how such trauma is incorporated into identity, or the centrality of the negative event, is also of considerable importance in understanding the development of psychological symptoms. Alternatively, positive event centrality may have positive effects on well-being in the face of trauma. Thus, the current study examined associations between positive and negative event centrality, and both adaptive and maladaptive outcomes, above and beyond the impact of traumatic experience. A sample of 214 college students completed a series of self-report questionnaires. As anticipated, negative event centrality predicted PTSD and other maladaptive measures of functioning, even after controlling for traumatic experience. High levels of positive event centrality predicted adaptive, as opposed to maladaptive, psychological functioning. Results also suggested that both positive and negative event centrality predicted posttraumatic growth, controlling for traumatic experience. These findings suggest that assessing centrality of trauma may also be valuable in the prediction of psychological symptoms. The implications of these findings and proposals for future work are discussed further.