Cognitive therapy and research · 2023
Effects of Training Body-Related Interpretations on Panic-Related Cognitions and Symptoms.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Würtz Felix, Steinman Shari, Blackwell Simon E, Wilhelm Frank H, Reinecke Andrea, Adolph Dirk, Margraf Jürgen, Woud Marcella L
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Interpretation biases (IBs) are central in panic disorder, and there is rich evidence showing that these are correlated with and predictive of panic-relevant symptomatology. However, experimental studies are needed to examine the potential causal effects of IBs, as predicted by cognitive models.
METHODS: Panic-related IBs were manipulated via a sentence-completion Cognitive Bias Modification-Interpretation (CBM-I) training. The sample included N = 112 healthy participants reporting moderate levels of fear of bodily sensations. Participants were randomly allocated to a positive, negative, or control CBM-I condition. To test the trainings' effect on panic-relevant cognitive processing, IBs were assessed via proximal and distal measures. Symptom provocation tasks were applied to test transfer to panic-relevant symptomatology.
RESULTS: Results on the proximal measure showed that positive CBM-I led to more positive IBs compared to negative, and control training. Further, positive CBM-I led to more positive IBs on the distal measure as compared to negative CBM-I. However, there were no differential training effects on panic-related symptomatology triggered via the provocation tasks.
CONCLUSION: The findings indicate a limited generalization of the effects of CBM-I on IBs and panic-related symptoms. Potential means to improve generalization, such as applying more nuanced measures and combining CBM-I with psychoeducation are discussed.
METHODS: Panic-related IBs were manipulated via a sentence-completion Cognitive Bias Modification-Interpretation (CBM-I) training. The sample included N = 112 healthy participants reporting moderate levels of fear of bodily sensations. Participants were randomly allocated to a positive, negative, or control CBM-I condition. To test the trainings' effect on panic-relevant cognitive processing, IBs were assessed via proximal and distal measures. Symptom provocation tasks were applied to test transfer to panic-relevant symptomatology.
RESULTS: Results on the proximal measure showed that positive CBM-I led to more positive IBs compared to negative, and control training. Further, positive CBM-I led to more positive IBs on the distal measure as compared to negative CBM-I. However, there were no differential training effects on panic-related symptomatology triggered via the provocation tasks.
CONCLUSION: The findings indicate a limited generalization of the effects of CBM-I on IBs and panic-related symptoms. Potential means to improve generalization, such as applying more nuanced measures and combining CBM-I with psychoeducation are discussed.