@article{ref1,
title="The Suicide Dot Probe Task: psychometric properties and validity in relation to suicide-related outcomes",
journal="Suicide and life-threatening behavior",
year="2023",
author="Rogers, Megan L. and Carosa, Catarina L. and Haliczer, Lauren A. and Hughes, Christopher D. and Schofield, Casey A. and Armey, Michael F.",
volume="ePub",
number="ePub",
pages="ePub-ePub",
abstract="BACKGROUND: Attentional biases to suicide-related stimuli have been linked to suicide-related outcomes. However, behavioral tasks that have been previously modified to capture suicide-specific attentional biases have demonstrated inconsistent reliability and validity. Adaptation of the Dot Probe Task, a computerized assessment that has been adapted to study a wide variety of biases, may be a promising candidate for assessing suicide-specific biases. <br><br>METHODS: In 280 recently discharged inpatients (51% male; M(age)  = 40.22 years), we evaluated the psychometric properties of a modified Suicide Dot Probe Task. Participants completed this task and assessments of suicidal thoughts and behaviors at baseline and 6-month follow-up. <br><br>RESULTS: The Suicide Dot Probe Task demonstrated poor-to-moderate internal consistency and poor test-retest reliability, and participant response times were slower to suicide-specific and dysphoric stimuli than positive stimuli. However, there were no differences based on the presence or characteristics of recent or lifetime suicidal ideation or attempts. Participants' suicide-specific biases were not predictive of suicidal ideation or attempts at follow-up. <br><br>CONCLUSIONS: The Suicide Dot Probe Task exhibited questionable reliability, and differences in attentional biases were not associated with suicidal ideation or attempts. This study contributes to a body of research demonstrating the questionable utility of several behavioral tasks to study suicide-specific attentional biases.<p /> <p>Language: en</p>",
language="en",
issn="0363-0234",
doi="10.1111/sltb.12999",
url="http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/sltb.12999"
}