RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Relevant implicit markers of suicidal thoughts and behaviors (STBs) have only been studied in isolation with mixed evidence. This is the first study that investigated a suicide attentional bias, a death-identity bias and a deficit in behavioral impulsivity in a high-risk sample and healthy controls. METHOD: We administered the Death Implicit Association Test, the Modified Suicide Stroop Task, and a Go/No-Go Task to inpatient suicide ideators (n = 42), suicide attempters (n = 40), and community controls (n = 61). RESULTS: Suicide ideators and attempters showed a suicide attentional bias and a death-identity bias compared to healthy controls. Ideators and attempters did not differ in these implicit information-processing biases. Notably, only attempters were more behaviorally impulsive compared to controls; however, ideators and attempters did not significantly differ in behavioral impulsivity. Moreover, implicit scores were positively intercorrelated in the total sample. CONCLUSION: In line with the Cognitive Model of Suicide, ideators and attempters display suicide-related information processing biases, which can be considered as implicit cognitive markers of suicide vulnerability. Furthermore, attempters have elevated levels of behavioral impulsiveness. These results are highly relevant in the context of crisis intervention strategies and warrant further research.
RESUMO
The Cognitive Model of Suicide proposes a suicide attentional bias in individuals with suicidal thoughts and behavior (STBs). The Suicide Stroop Task (SST) was developed as a behavioral measure to assess this attentional bias. However, prior studies demonstrated poor psychometric properties of the SST. Methods: We developed a modified Suicide Stroop Task (M-SST) and tested its psychometric properties in a sample of healthy controls (n = 30) and inpatients with STBs (n = 24). Participants (50% female, aged 18 to 61 years) completed the M-SST with neutral, positive, negative, suicide-related positive and suicide-related negative words. Interference scores were calculated by subtracting the mean reaction time (mean RT) of the neutral words from the mean RT of the suicide-related positive words (mean RTSuicide-Positive-mean RTNeutral) and suicide-related negative words (mean RTSuicide-Negative-mean RTNeutral), resulting in two suicide-specific interference scores. Similarly, interference scores were calculated for the positive and negative words by subtracting the mean RT of neutral words from the mean RT of positive and negative words. Results: When analyzed separately, patients with STBs showed greater interferences for suicide-related positive words (p = 0.039), and for suicide-related negative words (p = 0.016), however, we found no group differences in interference scores for positive and negative words, suggesting a suicide attentional bias in patients with STBs. Controlling for the repeated measure design, a repeated measure ANOVA failed to detect a significant group × interference interaction effect (p = 0.176), which limits the generalizability of the findings. However, the interference score of suicide-related negative words showed an adequate classification accuracy (AUC = 0.72, 95% CI [0.58-0.86], p = 0.006) for differentiating between healthy controls and patients with STBs. Moreover, the interference scores showed acceptable internal reliability for the total sample and only suicide-related interference scores were correlated with clinical characteristics, thus demonstrating convergent validity. Conclusion: The results provide preliminary evidence for a suicide attentional bias in individuals with STBs compared to healthy controls. The M-SST represents a promising tool for assessing a suicide attentional bias by revealing adequate psychometric properties. Future studies with larger samples are needed to confirm these preliminary findings.
