Content uploaded by Mahdi Mazidi
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Mahdi Mazidi on Nov 15, 2024
Content may be subject to copyright.
1
From Information to Worry: How Selective Interrogation of Information Shapes
Expectancies in the Prenatal Period
Authors:
Mahdi Mazidi a, Ben Grafton a, Michelle Moulds b, Jill Newby b,c, Colin MacLeod a
a Centre for the Advancement of Research on Emotion, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, WA,
Australia
b School of Psychology, UNSW Sydney, NSW, Australia
c Black Dog Institute, Sydney, NSW, Australia
Corresponding author: Mahdi Mazidi
Email: mahdi.mazidisharafabadi@uwa.edu.au
Address: School of Psychological Science M304, The University of Western Australia, 35
Stirling Highway, Crawley, 6009, Australia.
2
From Information to Worry: How Selective Interrogation of Information Shapes
Expectancies in the Prenatal Period
Abstract
The current study explored the association between elevated prenatal worry and negative
expectancies about parenthood and the potential cognitive mechanisms driving such
expectancies. Two main hypotheses were examined: First, that negative expectancies about
parenthood contribute to elevated prenatal worry, and second, negative selective interrogation
of information about parenthood contributes to the formation of more negative expectancies
about parenthood. The study recruited 92 first-time pregnant women and evaluated their
prenatal worry, parenthood expectancies, and tendency to volitionally choose negative rather
than positive information about parenthood (i.e., demonstrate a negative interrogation bias).
Our findings revealed a significant association between negative expectancies about
parenthood and elevated prenatal worry. Additionally, those with a negative interrogation
bias were more likely to hold negative expectancies concerning parenthood. The relationship
between this bias and prenatal worry was mediated by negative expectancies. Findings are
discussed with regards to limitations and potential implications for expectancy-focused
interventions for prenatal worry.
Keywords: Negative Expectancies; Prenatal Worry; Cognitive Bias; Parenthood
3
The relationship between negative expectancies and mental health has long been a
subject of interest in psychology (de Jong & Daniels, 2020; Rief & Joormann, 2019). A large
body of research shows that negative expectancies play a key role in determining mental
health outcomes across various contexts (Horwitz et al., 2017; Rief et al., 2015). One area in
which negative expectancies may be of particular importance is the perinatal period, the
window of time from conception to one-year postpartum. The perinatal period is
characterized by the formation of expectancies, which often concern the transition to
becoming a parent for the first time, that may play an important role in mental health across
this period (Deutsch et al., 1988; Preis et al., 2018; Webb et al., 2021). Intriguingly, while
there is some evidence that negative expectancies about parenthood may protect against
postnatal depression by increasing the prospect that the actual experience of parenthood will
be more positive than anticipated (Harwood et al., 2007), such negative expectancies may
contribute to elevated levels of prenatal worry by increasing apprehension about the future
(Mihelic et al., 2016; Sinesi et al., 2019). However, there is very limited evidence supporting
the association between negative expectancies about parenthood and prenatal worry. Given
the established detrimental consequences of prenatal worry (Moulds et al., 2022), it is
important to determine whether this relationship is robust. Therefore, the first aim of the
current study was to determine whether there is an association between negative expectancies
about parenthood and elevated levels of prenatal worry.
Thus, the first hypothesis tested in the current study is that negative expectancies
about parenthood statistically predict elevated levels of prenatal worry. If this hypothesis is
correct, a positive association should emerge between the degree to which pregnant women
report negative parenthood expectancies and their levels of prenatal worry. Further, should
this predictive relationship emerge, it will also be important to understand the cognitive
mechanisms that may underpin the development of such negative expectancies.
4
Consequently, the current study will also test a novel hypothesis concerning a cognitive
mechanism that may contribute to elevated negative expectancies about parenthood. This
hypothesis implicates individual differences in the information that individuals choose to
access concerning potentially stressful approaching events.
When faced with an approaching event, people will often choose to access
information about it in order to give themselves a sense of what to expect. It is plausible that
a heightened tendency to try to find out more information (i.e., selectively interrogate) that is
negative rather than positive about an approaching event may contribute to the formation of
more negative expectancies about the event. Although the importance of the type of
information that individuals choose to engage with on their expectancies is not a new idea
(see Curtin, 2022), there has been limited effort in the systematic study of this possibility,
primarily due to the lack of a standard methodology that permits such assessment (Kelly &
Sharot, 2021). However, emerging studies are beginning to address this limitation. In one
such study, Reynolds et al. (2024) tested the hypothesis that the tendency to selectively
interrogate more negative than positive information regarding an upcoming film viewing
event predicted negative expectancies about it. Specifically, participants were informed that
they would be required to view a potentially stressful video and were given the opportunity to
selectively interrogate negative and positive information about it by choosing which reviews
from previous viewers they wanted to read. Individuals who selectively interrogated more
negative than positive information about the upcoming video formed more negative
expectancies about the video compared to those who did not exhibit such selective
interrogation. Thus, although as yet untested, it is plausible that a negative interrogation bias
concerning parenthood may contribute to the formation of more negative expectancies about
parenthood. If this hypothesis is correct, we will observe a positive association between the
5
degree to which pregnant women exhibit bias in the selective interrogation of negative
information about parenthood and their negative expectancies about parenthood.
If both of the above-mentioned hypotheses are true, then it follows that negative bias
in the selective interrogation of information about parenthood may contribute to elevated
prenatal worry, in a manner that is mediated by negative expectancies about parenthood. We
will test this third prediction by conducting a mediation analysis in which negative
interrogation bias is the predictor, prenatal worry is the outcome variable, and the
expectancies serve as the proposed mediator.
In order to determine the empirical validity of the two proposed hypotheses, in the
current study we assessed first-time pregnant women’s levels of prenatal worry and their
expectancies about parenthood, and measured their tendency to selectively interrogate
negative information about parenthood. In addition, we re-assessed expectancies following
assessment of negative interrogation bias, to determine whether engaging in selective
interrogation of negative information is associated with a change in expectancies about
parenthood.
Transparency and Openness
The de-identified data, data dictionary, and R scripts for the current study are openly
available in the Open Science Framework at https://osf.io/6vxy4/. The complete materials
used for the Selective Interrogation Assessment Task are available as Supplemental Material.
The selective interrogation of information task used in the current study as well as an editable
version of the task developed is available for download at https://shorturl.at/H6H3H. The
study was conducted in accordance with approval from the University of Western Australia
Ethics Committee.
Method
6
Participants
Participants were 92 first-time pregnant women recruited via the Prolific platform
(Mage = 30.46, SD = 5.88, range = 19-42). Prolific is one of the most commonly used
platforms for online data collection. Research indicates that data quality from Prolific is
higher compared to other platforms, such as MTurk and Qualtrics (Douglas et al., 2023; Peer
et al., 2022). A screening procedure was employed to ensure that only first-time pregnant
women could proceed to the main experiment. The advertisement on Prolific did not specify
that first-time pregnant women were the required participants for the experiment to avoid
biased responses in the eligibility screening. The set of questions used for the screening were
'Have you previously been pregnant?', 'How many children do you currently have?', and 'Are
you currently pregnant for the first time?' Any responses indicating that a participant was not
a first-time pregnant woman led to their exclusion from the study. Of these women, 41 were
in their first trimester, 38 in their second trimester, and 13 in their last trimester. The mean
duration of pregnancy was 15.74 weeks (SD = 8.64). Across participants the distribution of
highest educational attainment was 22.82% high-school qualification, 59.78% undergraduate
college degree, 15.22% Master’s degree, and 2.17% PhD. Among the participants, 57.04%
had a full-time job, 14.72% were employed part-time, 4.6% were on maternity leave, 4.6%
were students, and 3.68% were unemployed. The sample size was deemed sufficient to detect
the hypothesised associations and simple mediation effects between selective interrogation
and prenatal worry. Due to novelty of the effects under test and an aim to detect effects of
practical significance, this calculation was made using the Inverse Square Root Method based
on the upper boundary of a moderate effect range (
min = .30) with 80% power at a
significance level of 0.05 ( Nmin = 69, Kock & Hadaya, 2018).
Questionnaire Measures
7
Measure of Negative Expectation About Parenthood (Parenting Expectations Measure;
Harwood, 2004)
The parenting expectations measure is an instrument designed to assess expectancies
about becoming a parent among first-time pregnant women. It consists of 55 items that cover
a range of potential positive and negative expectancies related to the transition to parenthood.
These expectancies include the anticipated impact on the women's relationship with their
partner, their social interactions encompassing family, friends, and colleagues, the perceived
challenges in caring for their baby, as well as the anticipated effects on their physical and
psychological well-being. Respondents rate each item on a 7-point scale ranging from 1
(strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree), and by reverse scoring the positive-items we
obtained negative expectancies about parenthood index. The parenting expectations measure
has shown good concurrent validity and reliability in pregnant participants (Harwood et al.,
2007), and has been used by different researchers to assess expectancies about parenthood
(e.g., Adams et al., 2021). In the present study, this measure demonstrated excellent internal
consistency, with Cronbach's α of at least .95.
Measure of Worry (Cambridge Worry Scale; Green et al., 2003)
We used the 16-item Cambridge Worry Scale (CWS) to index worry during
pregnancy (Moulds et al., 2022). Participants are asked to rate the degree to which various
pregnancy-specific issues such as coping with the new baby, their own health, money
problems etc, is a source of worry for them. Each item is rated on a 6-point Likert scale
ranging from 0 = not a worry to 5 = major worry. The CWS has shown good validity and
reliability in perinatal populations (Sinesi et al., 2019). Internal consistency (Cronbach’s α) in
the current study was .89.
Selective Interrogation Assessment Task Stimuli
8
The selective interrogation assessment task used in this study required participants to
click on “information cues” relating to positive or negative aspects of early parenthood, in
order to receive a three sentence “narrative transcript” describing that experience in more
detail. A total of 64 information cues were developed, 32 of which related to potential
positive experiences (positive information cues) and 32 of which related to potential negative
experiences during early parenthood (negative information cues). For both positive and
negative information cues, these experiences spanned issues associated with
physical/psychological health, relationships, career/finance, and parenting role. Each
information cue consisted of two components: 1) situation component: a two-word phrase
referring to a specific type of positive or negative situation that mothers may encounter
during their first year of parenthood (e.g., caring family; challenging breastfeeding), and 2)
emotion component: a single word referring to a particular (positive or negative) emotion
likely to be experienced in that situation (e.g., assured; frustrated). Examples of information
cues are shown in the upper left section of Table 1.
For each information cue, a three-sentence narrative transcript was created
(supposedly provided by a first-time mother) that described personally encountering this
specific situation and experiencing this emotion. Each narrative transcript was generated by
the ChatGPT platform (OpenAI, 2023), which was provided with a standardised prompt
format. Specifically, the prompt given to ChatGPT was as follows: “Provide an example, in
three sentences, of a first-time mother detailing her experience across the first year of
motherhood. The description should be about experiences involving [information cue
situation component] that made her feel [information cue emotion component]. Describe this
as a [positive/negative] experience rather a [negative/positive] experience
1
. The description
1
The text of the prompt read “a negative experience rather than a positive experience” when generating
narrative transcripts for negative information cues and read “a positive experience rather than a negative
experience” when generating narrative transcripts for positive information cues”.
9
should be worded as a personal account given by the mother”. Examples of the resulting three
sentence narrative transcripts are provided in Table 1. The narrative transcripts were then
read by the experimenters to verify that they are relevant and naturalistic material required for
the study. The complete set of narrative transcripts and information cues is given in the
supplementary material.
Table 1. Examples of a positive and a negative information cue with their associated narrative text
Cue (event
type: emotion)
Narrative text
Rewarding
moments:
Uplifted
Experiencing the first year of motherhood has been a whirlwind of emotions, but
amidst the challenges, there have been countless rewarding moments that have
uplifted my spirit. From seeing my baby's first smile to hearing their infectious
laughter, these precious moments have filled my heart with immense joy and love.
The feeling of knowing that I am guiding and nurturing this little life brings a
sense of fulfillment that uplifts my soul every day.
Physical toll:
Irritable
Being a first-time mother has been physically demanding, and it has taken a toll
on my body and emotions. The constant physical toil, from carrying my growing
baby to sleepless nights filled with rocking and comforting, has left me feeling
utterly exhausted and irritable. It's challenging to maintain my patience when my
body aches and fatigue engulfs me, making even the simplest tasks feel like
insurmountable mountains.
Selective Interrogation Assessment Task
To assess participants' selective interrogation bias, we adapted the selective
interrogation assessment task employed by Reynolds et al. (2024) to provide participants with
the opportunity to access positive and negative information about parenthood. In this task,
participants were recruited online and were presented with four-by-four grids, each
displaying 16 information cues. Within each grid, 8 of these were positive information cues
and 8 were negative information cues. Participants were required to choose which
information cues to click on, using the mouse-controlled cursor and button. Clicking on an
10
information cue resulted in presentation of the corresponding narrative transcript. After
reading this narrative transcript, the participant pressed the spacebar to return to the four-by-
four grid, from which the previously chosen information cue was now removed. The
participant then chose another information cue to click on. For each grid of 16 information
cues, this continued until 8 cues had been clicked on, and the corresponding narrative
transcript read. Following this, a new grid of 16 information cues was presented. Across the
selective interrogation assessment task, four different grids were shown, thereby providing
participants with the option of selecting any of the 64 information cues, to access the
corresponding narrative transcript. The index of negative interrogation bias for each
participant was simply the percentage of their (32) chosen information cues that were
negative information cues. A higher score on this “negative interrogation bias index” would
indicate a greater relative tendency to selectively interrogate negative (as opposed to positive)
information concerning the first year of parenthood. The selective interrogation assessment
task demonstrated acceptable internal reliability, as evidenced by an odd-even split-half
reliability coefficient of 0.73.
Procedure
Participants were recruited through an advertisement on Prolific. Using the
previously-mentioned screening procedure, first-time pregnant women were invited to take
part in the experiment, and participants required provision of informed consent. The
experimental session was delivered online using Inquisit 6 by Millisecond (2021; version
6.5.2). Participants completed demographic questions, Cambridge Worry Scale, Parenting
Expectations Measure, and the Selective Interrogation Assessment Task (in that order). Next
participants again completed the parenting expectancies measure. The session took an
average of around 30 min to complete, and participants were compensated US$7.
11
Results
The following section details findings from a series of analyses conducted to examine
the predictions generated by each hypothesis outlined earlier. All analyses were conducted
both with and without controlling for participants' age, education, and employment status.
Since the pattern of the results was the same in both cases, only the latter are reported for
ease of interpretation.
Hypothesis 1: negative expectancies about parenthood predict elevated prenatal worry
This prediction was tested through a regression model that included negative
expectancies about parenthood index
2
as the predictor and prenatal worry index as the
outcome variable. As predicted, there was a statistically significant positive relationship
between the two indices (b = 9.16, t = 5.29, p < .001), supporting the hypothesis that negative
parenthood expectancies statistically predict elevated prenatal worry.
Hypothesis 2: negative selective interrogation of information about parenthood predicts
elevated negative parenthood expectancies
This prediction was tested through a regression model that included negative
interrogation bias index as the predictor and parenthood negative expectancies index 2 as the
outcome variable. As hypothesised, there was a statistically significant and positive
relationship between the two indices (b = 0.02, t = 3.87, p < .001).
Given that the predictions generated by each hypothesis alone were supported, we
proceeded to test the third prediction arising from both hypotheses together: namely, that
negative selective interrogation of information will predict prenatal worry in a manner that is
mediated by negative expectancies concerning parenthood. To test this, a mediation model
was tested using Partial Least Squares Structure Equation Modelling in the SEMinR package
2
It should be noted that for testing all predictions generated by the hypotheses, the reported results used the
'negative expectancies about parenthood' index from the first assessment. The same analyses were replicated
using the second assessment of parenthood expectancies, and the pattern of results was the same.
12
(v2.3.2, Hair et al., 2021), and the model was bootstrapped with 1,000 repetitions
3
. The
model included the negative interrogation bias index as the predictor and negative parenthood
expectancies index as the proposed mediator. The outcome variable was the prenatal worry
index. The results of the mediation model revealed that the negative interrogation bias index
was indeed associated with the prenatal worry index in a manner that was mediated by the
negative parenthood expectancies index, as the confidence intervals of indirect effects did not
contain zero (bootstrapped β = .17, SD = .05, t = 3.52, 95% CI = 0.08 to 0.27), indicating
significant effects. See Figure 1 for a depiction of the serial mediation model.
Figure 1. Diagram of serial mediation model analysis. * indicates statistical significance. Note: Non-
bootstrapped pathway coefficients are reported. c is total effect of negative interrogation bias on prenatal
worry that does not consider mediators while c’ is direct effect model.
Thus, the results of this mediation analysis support the third prediction that negative
selective interrogation of information statistically predicts elevated prenatal worry in a
manner that is mediated by negative expectancies concerning parenthood.
Secondary Analysis: Assessing Parenting Expectancy Change after Selective
Interrogation of Information
We re-assessed parenthood expectancies after the selective interrogation task, to
examine whether negative selective interrogation was positively associated with the elevation
of negative parenthood expectancies from pre to post the interrogation assessment task. To do
3
The same mediation model was tested using PROCESS syntax with a bias-corrected bootstrapping (10,000
resamples) and the pattern of the results were the same.
13
so, we first computed a “negative expectancy elevation” index for each participant. This
involved subtracting their negative expectancies of parenthood index scores post-
interrogation assessment task from their negative expectancies of parenthood index scores
pre-interrogation assessment task. Higher scores on the negative expectancy elevation index
indicated a greater increase in negative expectancies of parenthood from pre to post the
interrogation assessment task. Negative expectancy elevation index was the outcome variable
in a regression analysis in which negative interrogation bias index was entered as the
predictor variable. The results of this analysis revealed that negative interrogation bias index
(b = 0.007, t = 3.13, p = .002) significantly predicted the negative expectancy elevation
index
4
. Thus, participants who engaged in greater selective interrogation of negative
information reported greater elevation in their negative expectancy of parenthood from pre to
post the interrogation task.
Discussion
The current study examined the cognitive mechanisms that underpin individual
differences in pregnant women’s tendency to experience prenatal worry. We found a
significant positive association between greater negative expectancies about parenthood and
prenatal worry. Furthermore, negative interrogation bias predicted greater negative
expectancies about parenthood. Finally, negative interrogation bias predicted greater prenatal
worry indirectly, in a manner that was mediated by elevated negative expectancies about
parenthood. These findings carry important theoretical and applied implications, each of
which will be considered in turn.
4
The same analysis was conducted with negative expectancy elevation index computed using the residualized
scores (Castro-Schilo & Grimm, 2017) and the pattern of the results were the same.
14
Our results illuminate the potentially important role that negative expectancies about
parenthood may play in eliciting prenatal worry. Negative expectancies about parenthood
may potentially heighten prenatal worry by framing the forthcoming experience of
motherhood in a primarily challenging light. Our findings add to the small number of studies
that have empirically demonstrated this association between negative expectancies about
parenthood and prenatal worry (Mihelic et al., 2016), and underscore the potentially
significant impact of such expectancies during pregnancy on women’s mental health. In
addition, our findings document another anxiety-linked cognitive bias, which we have
labelled the negative interrogation bias. Our results show this bias to be associated with
elevated negative expectancies and prenatal worry during pregnancy. When anticipating the
arrival of a baby, perhaps especially for first-time mothers, there are numerous ways in which
negative interrogation bias could manifest in real-world settings. For instance, when
navigating online forums and parenting blogs, a pregnant woman might selectively
interrogate posts or threads that focus on the challenges of parenting — perhaps concerning
the strain that parenting puts on marital relationships, or the potential isolation felt when
staying at home to care for one’s child — while overlooking posts or threads that share
successful stories and heart-warming moments associated with parenting. Similarly, when
connecting with mothers in her social circle, a pregnant woman might ask more often about
the experiences of those who often discuss the stresses and anxieties of parenthood rather
than about the experiences of those who tend to talk about positive aspects of parenthood.
Although the present study examined only the selective interrogation of information
concerning the parenthood experience, a negative interrogation bias for other types of
information may play a role in forming prenatal expectancies in other domains (e.g., physical
health across the remainder of pregnancy, the experience of childbirth). For example, a
pregnant woman might find herself scrolling through online forums and selectively accessing
15
information from posts that share extremely negative experiences of pregnancy and
childbirth. Instead of providing balanced perspectives, this negative interrogation bias might
lead to increased negative expectancies, which in turn lead to elevated worry concerning such
aspects of the perinatal experience. Future studies could capitalize on the same design of the
current study to examine the role of negative interrogation bias in other prenatal expectancies
and prenatal worry.
When considering applied implications, our findings indicate that targeting
expectancies might be an effective approach for interventions aiming to reduce prenatal
worry. The role of negative expectancies in anxiety disorders has been established by prior
research (Pittig et al., 2023). For example, individuals with social anxiety disorder tend to
hold disproportionately negative expectancies concerning situations in which they might face
social judgment, such as when giving a speech (Taylor et al., 2010). Consequently, cognitive
therapy interventions for anxiety disorders may challenge such negative expectancies. The
current findings suggest that modifying a negative interrogation bias may serve to decrease
negative expectancies in ways that can attenuate anxiety. In particular, the current findings
invite speculation that prenatal worry may be attenuated by promoting the adoption of
interrogation strategies that favour positive information concerning parenthood, given that
this will serve to reduce negative expectancies that contribute to prenatal worry. Such bias
modification could be approached through direct training methods, such as psychoeducation
that promotes more adaptive strategies for information interrogation, or through indirect bias
modification procedures that expose individuals to contingencies that implicitly train
interrogation strategies that favour positive information.
It is important to consider how patterns of selectivity might affect postnatal emotional
well-being. Of course, postnatally, women may continue to worry about unfamiliar aspects of
parenthood that may reflect the interrogation strategies and expectations that they have
16
concerning future challenges. An important consideration is the potential impact of a
mismatch between prenatal expectancies and postnatal experiences on depression. It warrants
consideration that efforts to alleviate prenatal worry by increasing positive expectancies
about parenthood do not increase the likelihood of such expectancy-experience mismatch.
Harwood et al. (2007) assessed expectancies about parenthood in first-time pregnant women
and observed that when postpartum experiences fell short of positive expectancies, there was
an increase in postnatal depression and a decline in relationship adjustment. In a similar vein,
when women anticipate more assistance from their partners post-childbirth than they actually
receive, they report a decline in marital satisfaction (Hackel & Ruble, 1992; Ruble et al.,
1988). Hence, it is possible that the ideal approach to expectancy modification during
pregnancy should not be to induce unduly positive expectancies, but rather to cultivate
unbiased realistic expectancies. Procedures to achieve this might involve contingencies
designed to induce interrogation strategies that result in exposure to the well-rounded mix of
both positive and negative information in order to foster balanced expectancies during the
perinatal period.
It should be noted that some of the above suggestions are premised on the assumption
that the presently observed associations reflect a causal chain, in which negative interrogation
bias causally leads to negative expectancies about parenthood, which in turn causally impact
prenatal worry. Although the findings of the current study are consistent with such a pattern
of causality, the cross-sectional nature of our experimental design does not permit causal
conclusions. Future use of longitudinal designs could permit stronger conclusions concerning
causality. For example, longitudinal studies could measure selective interrogation of
information, prenatal expectancies, and prenatal worry of women at several timepoints, to
determine whether the variation in the former measures precede and predict subsequent
variation in the later measures. A stronger test of causality will be provided by future
17
investigations that systematically manipulate the variables implicated in the observed
mediation model, to verify that such manipulation has downstream effects consistent with the
causal hypothesis under test. The cognitive bias modification literature is rich in studies that
have successfully manipulated different cognitive biases to test hypotheses concerning their
causal contribution to emotional symptomatology (e.g., see Beard & Peckham, 2020;
MacLeod et al., 2002; MacLeod & Grafton, 2016). Future studies that capitalize on this
approach could allow researchers to test if modifying negative interrogation bias directly
influences negative expectancy bias, and whether this expectancy change in turn
subsequently affects prenatal worry.
Given that participants in the present study were not selected on the basis of having
clinical levels of prenatal worry, it would be premature to assume that our findings will
generalize to pregnant women with anxiety disorders. Future studies could directly examine
such cohorts of women to address this limitation. In addition, no data of participants’ ethnic
backgrounds were recorded in the current study. Future research could systematically
examine the potential variations in the role of expectancies and prenatal worry across
different cultural contexts. Furthermore, the lack of pre-registration in the current study
should be acknowledged as a limitation. There has been an increasing recommendation for
pre-registration in research (see Simmons et al., 2021), and future studies in this area would
benefit from pre-registering hypotheses and methods. Despite these limitations, the current
study provides valuable insight into cognitive processes implicated in elevated prenatal worry
in first time pregnant women. Our findings are consistent with the hypothesis that a negative
interrogation bias of information about the upcoming event of parenthood serves to elevate
negative expectancies about parenthood, which in turn elicits heightened prenatal worry.
These findings highlight a potential focus of cognitive interventions for prenatal worry and
18
encourage future clinical researchers to investigate intervention techniques that have the
capacity to modify negative interrogation bias.
The current study was the first that adapted and employed the selective interrogation
of information task in the prenatal context. Recent studies have begun to examine the
potential role of selective interrogation of information in areas such as trait anxiety (Reynolds
et al., 2024) and sugar-sweetened beverage consumption (Dondzilo & Kemps, 2024).
However, the ubiquitous nature of accessible information in modern life and its relevance to
numerous other domains suggest that this approach could be applied to many other areas as
well, with the selective interrogation of information task providing a methodology capable of
systematically assessing individuals’ biases in the type of information they seek.
19
Funding
This work was supported by an Australian Research Council Grant FL170100167. The
funders had no role in study design, data collection, analysis, the decision to publish or
preparation of the manuscript.
Author Contributions
Conceptualization: M. Mazidi, B. Grafton, and C. MacLeod; Methodology: M. Mazidi, B.
Grafton, and C. MacLeod; Formal Analysis: M. Mazidi, J. Newby; M. Moulds; Software: B.
Grafton, M. Mazidi; Investigation: M. Mazidi; Writing – Original Draft Preparation: M.
Mazidi; Writing – Review & Editing: M. Mazidi, J. Newby; M. Moulds, B. Grafton, C.
MacLeod
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that there were no conflicts of interest with respect to the authorship or
the publication of this article.
20
References
Adams, M. K., Byrn, M., Penckofer, S., Bryant, F., & Almonte, A. (2021). Expectations of
Motherhood and Quality of Life. MCN: The American Journal of Maternal/Child
Nursing, 46(2).
https://journals.lww.com/mcnjournal/Fulltext/2021/03000/Expectations_of_Motherhood
_and_Quality_of_Life.2.aspx
Beard, C., & Peckham, A. D. (2020). Interpretation bias modification. In Clinical handbook
of fear and anxiety: Maintenance processes and treatment mechanisms. (pp. 359–377).
American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000150-020
Castro-Schilo, L., & Grimm, K. J. (2017). Using residualized change versus difference scores
for longitudinal research. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 35(1), 32–58.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407517718387
Curtin, R. T. (2022). A New Theory of Expectations. Journal of Business Cycle Research,
18(3), 239–259. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41549-022-00074-w
de Jong, P. J., & Daniels, J. K. (2020). Negative expectancy biases in psychopathology. In
Cognitive biases in health and psychiatric disorders: Neurophysiological foundations.
(pp. 71–97). Elsevier Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-816660-
4.00004-0
Deutsch, F. M., Ruble, D. N., Fleming, A., Brooks-Gunn, J., & Stangor, C. (1988).
Information-seeking and maternal self-definition during the transition to motherhood. In
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (Vol. 55, Issue 3, pp. 420–431). American
Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.55.3.420
Dondzilo, L., & Kemps, E. (2024). The role of cognitive biases involving selective
interrogation of taste-based information in sugar-sweetened beverage consumption.
Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 85, 101979.
21
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbtep.2024.101979
Douglas, B. D., Ewell, P. J., & Brauer, M. (2023). Data quality in online human-subjects
research: Comparisons between MTurk, Prolific, CloudResearch, Qualtrics, and SONA.
PLOS ONE, 18(3), e0279720. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0279720
Green, J. M., Kafetsios, K., Statham, H. E., & Snowdon, C. M. (2003). Factor Structure,
Validity and Reliability of the Cambridge Worry Scale in a Pregnant Population.
Journal of Health Psychology, 8(6), 753–764.
https://doi.org/10.1177/13591053030086008
Hackel, L. S., & Ruble, D. N. (1992). Changes in the marital relationship after the first baby
is born: predicting the impact of expectancy disconfirmation. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 62(6), 944–957. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.62.6.944
Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., Danks, N. P., & Ray, S. (2021). The
SEMinR Package BT - Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM)
Using R: A Workbook (J. F. Hair Jr., G. T. M. Hult, C. M. Ringle, M. Sarstedt, N. P.
Danks, & S. Ray (eds.); pp. 49–74). Springer International Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80519-7_3
Harwood, K. (2004). Women’s parenting expectations and their influence on adjustment to
parenthood. University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia, Australia.
Harwood, K., McLean, N., & Durkin, K. (2007). First-time mothers’ expectations of
parenthood: What happens when optimistic expectations are not matched by later
experiences? Developmental Psychology, 43(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-
1649.43.1.1
Horwitz, A. G., Berona, J., Czyz, E. K., Yeguez, C. E., & King, C. A. (2017). Positive and
Negative Expectations of Hopelessness as Longitudinal Predictors of Depression,
Suicidal Ideation, and Suicidal Behavior in High-Risk Adolescents. Suicide & Life-
22
Threatening Behavior, 47(2), 168–176. https://doi.org/10.1111/sltb.12273
Kelly, C. A., & Sharot, T. (2021). Individual differences in information-seeking. Nature
Communications, 12(1), 7062. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-27046-5
Kock, N., & Hadaya, P. (2018). Minimum sample size estimation in PLS-SEM: The inverse
square root and gamma-exponential methods. Information Systems Journal, 28(1), 227–
261. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12131
MacLeod, C., & Grafton, B. (2016). Anxiety-linked attentional bias and its modification:
Illustrating the importance of distinguishing processes and procedures in experimental
psychopathology research. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 86, 68–86.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2016.07.005
MacLeod, C., Rutherford, E., Campbell, L., Ebsworthy, G., & Holker, L. (2002). Selective
attention and emotional vulnerability: assessing the causal basis of their association
through the experimental manipulation of attentional bias. Journal of Abnormal
Psychology, 111(1), 107–123.
Mihelic, M., Filus, A., & Morawaska, A. (2016). Correlates of Prenatal Parenting
Expectations in new Mothers: Is Better Self-Efficacy a Potential Target for Preventing
Postnatal Adjustment Difficulties? Prevention Science : The Official Journal of the
Society for Prevention Research, 17(8), 949–959. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-016-
0682-z
Moulds, M. L., Bisby, M. A., Black, M. J., Jones, K., Harrison, V., Hirsch, C. R., & Newby,
J. M. (2022). Repetitive negative thinking in the perinatal period and its relationship
with anxiety and depression. Journal of Affective Disorders, 311(May), 446–462.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2022.05.070
Peer, E., Rothschild, D., Gordon, A., Evernden, Z., & Damer, E. (2022). Data quality of
platforms and panels for online behavioral research. Behavior Research Methods, 54(4),
23
1643–1662. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-021-01694-3
Pittig, A., Heinig, I., Goerigk, S., Richter, J., Hollandt, M., Lueken, U., Pauli, P., Deckert, J.,
Kircher, T., Straube, B., Neudeck, P., Koelkebeck, K., Dannlowski, U., Arolt, V.,
Fydrich, T., Fehm, L., Ströhle, A., Totzeck, C., Margraf, J., … Wittchen, H. U. (2023).
Change of Threat Expectancy as Mechanism of Exposure-Based Psychotherapy for
Anxiety Disorders: Evidence From 8,484 Exposure Exercises of 605 Patients. Clinical
Psychological Science, 11(2), 199–217. https://doi.org/10.1177/21677026221101379
Preis, H., Lobel, M., & Benyamini, Y. (2018). Between Expectancy and Experience: Testing
a Model of Childbirth Satisfaction. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 43(1), 105–117.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684318779537
Reynolds, A., MacLeod, C., & Grafton, B. (2024). The role of expectancies and selective
interrogation of information in trait anxiety-linked affect when approaching potentially
stressful future events. Behaviour Research and Therapy.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2024.104568
Rief, W., Glombiewski, J. A., Gollwitzer, M., Schubö, A., Schwarting, R., & Thorwart, A.
(2015). Expectancies as core features of mental disorders. Current Opinion in
Psychiatry, 28(5), 378–385. https://doi.org/10.1097/YCO.0000000000000184
Rief, W., & Joormann, J. (2019). Revisiting the Cognitive Model of Depression: The Role of
Expectations. Clinical Psychology in Europe, 1(1), 1–19.
https://doi.org/10.32872/cpe.v1i1.32605
Ruble, D. N., Fleming, A. S., Hackel, L. S., & Stangor, C. (1988). Changes in the marital
relationship during the transition to first time motherhood: Effects of violated
expectations concerning division of household labor. In Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology (Vol. 55, Issue 1, pp. 78–87). American Psychological Association.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.55.1.78
24
Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., & Simonsohn, U. (2021). Pre-registration : Why and How. 31.
https://doi.org/10.1002/jcpy.1208
Sinesi, A., Maxwell, M., O’Carroll, R., & Cheyne, H. (2019). Anxiety scales used in
pregnancy: systematic review. BJPsych Open, 5(1), e5.
https://doi.org/10.1192/bjo.2018.75
Taylor, S., Wald, J., Taylor, S., & Wald, J. (2010). Expectations and Attributions in Social
Anxiety Disorder : Diagnostic Distinctions and Relationship to General Anxiety and
Depression Expectations and Attributions in Social Anxiety Disorder : Diagnostic
Distinctions and Relationship to General Anxiety an. 6073(May).
https://doi.org/10.1080/16506070310020315
Webb, R., Ayers, S., Bogaerts, A., Jeličić, L., Pawlicka, P., Van Haeken, S., Uddin, N.,
Xuereb, R. B., & Kolesnikova, N. (2021). When birth is not as expected: a systematic
review of the impact of a mismatch between expectations and experiences. In BMC
pregnancy and childbirth (Vol. 21, Issue 1, p. 475). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-021-
03898-z
