Hughes, Alicia M, Gordon, Rola, Chalder, Trudie et al. · British journal of health psychology · 2016 · DOI
This paper is a guide for researchers on how to properly design experiments that test whether people with conditions like ME/CFS have unconscious biases in how they pay attention to and interpret information about their illness. The authors explain that many past studies used different, untested materials, making it hard to compare results. They provide a step-by-step process and practical tools to help researchers create better, standardized materials for these types of studies.
For ME/CFS research, this paper provides a much-needed methodological framework to improve the quality and comparability of cognitive bias studies in the field. By establishing standardized approaches to designing experimental materials, researchers can conduct more rigorous, reproducible studies to understand whether cognitive biases (such as focusing on fatigue-related threat) play a role in maintaining ME/CFS symptoms, potentially informing new treatment targets.
This is a methodological paper, not an empirical study, so it does not provide data proving that cognitive biases exist in ME/CFS or that modifying these biases will improve outcomes. It does not establish causation; it only provides tools for future research to better test for causal relationships. The paper does not itself conduct experiments—it proposes how future experiments should be designed.
About the PEM badge: “PEM required” means post-exertional malaise was an explicit required diagnostic criterion for participant inclusion in this study — not that PEM was studied, observed, or discussed. Studies using criteria that do not require PEM (e.g. Fukuda, Oxford) are tagged “PEM not required”. How the atlas works →
Spotted an error in this entry? Report it →