Abstract: Previous literatures demonstrate that clinically anxious patients are very sensitive to threatening stimuli. Further, it is easier for them to be engaged in threatening stimuli, after which they find it hard to shift their attention to other kinds of stimuli in the situation. However, not many studies have been conducted to demonstrate the attentional bias of high trait anxious (HTA) individuals, which was the subject of the present study. Are these individuals more sensitive to threat? Is it easy for them to be engaged in threat, and is it hard to distract their attention? What is the underlying mechanism in such cases of attentional bias?
Two experiments were designed according to the paradigm “odd-one-out search task” to test whether HTA individuals are more vigilant to threats or whether it is hard to distract their attention from the threat. In experiment 1, 20 HTA individuals and 20 low trait anxious (LTA) individuals selected from among 400 college students by using the Chinese version of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI-T) 1983, developed by Spielberger et al. They participated in the test under peaceful conditions (no anxiety-eliciting task). The participants were asked to ascertain whether there was any different face in the square containing 12 faces as soon as possible. In order to test attentional sensitivity to threatening (or unthreatening) stimuli, the participants were required to discriminate an angry face (or a happy face) from among 12 faces in a square (1 emotional face with 11 neutral faces). In order to test attentional distraction from threatening (or unthreatening) stimuli, the participants were required to discriminate a neutral face from among 12 faces in a square (1 neutral face with 11 angry or happy faces). The experiment measured the time of judgment and emotional change in the meanwhile. In experiment 2, 19 HTA and 19 LTA participants selected from among 300 college students by using the STAI-T were tested through the “odd-one-out search task” after an anxiety-eliciting task.
The results revealed the following. (1) Under peaceful conditions, both the HTA and LTA groups were found to be more susceptible to a happy face than to an angry face. It was difficult to distract both groups from angry faces. However, as compared to the LTA group, it was more difficult to disengage the attention of the HTA group from angry faces. (2) It was more difficult to disengage the HTA group’s attention from the angry faces than from happy faces when they were in highly anxious mood. On the other hand, it was harder to disengage the attention of the LTA group from the happy faces than from the anger faces. There was no significant difference in the HTA group’s attentional sensitivity to happy and angry faces; meanwhile, the LTA group was more sensitive to happy face than to anger face.
It can be concluded that HTA individuals were not particularly attention-sensitive to threatening stimulus, but they were much more difficult to disengage their attention from threatening stimuli. Meanwhile, the LTA individuals were more attention-sensitive to pleasant stimuli and were easily engaged in pleasant stimuli. The study further suggested that a higher degree of anxiety and the fact that is easier to elicit an anxious mood in HTA subjects would play a key role in the attentional bias

Key words: high trait anxious, attentional sensitivity, attentional disengagement, odd-one-out search tas