Journal of behavior therapy and experimental psychiatry · 2022
Social problem-solving attitudes and performance as a function of differences in trait and state worry.
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.
Szabo Judit, Koerner Naomi, Carney Colleen E
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: This study investigated problem-solving attitudes and state-dependent, performance-based problem-solving abilities of individuals with high trait worry as compared to those low in trait worry. Secondary objectives involved investigating the relationship between problem-solving effectiveness and processes hypothesized to influence worry and problem-solving (i.e., working memory, attentional control, emotional dysregulation, and concreteness of thought).
METHODS: A 2 (group: high worry, n = 68, vs. low worry, n = 66) X 2 (induction type: worry vs. neutral mentation) factorial design was employed to investigate the differential effects of state worry, and neutral mentation for comparison, on performance-based problem-solving effectiveness. Independent samples t-tests tested for group differences in self-reported problem-solving attitudes. Multiple regression analyses were used to investigate if aforementioned processes predict problem-solving effectiveness.
RESULTS: Previous findings that individuals with high trait worry endorse greater tendencies to self-report unconstructive problem-solving attitudes were replicated. Contrary to predictions, there were no significant within or between group differences on problem-solving performance. Concreteness of problem solutions was the only consistent predictor of problem-solving effectiveness.
LIMITATIONS: Study did not directly assess problem-solving for personal problems.
CONCLUSIONS: Disparities in self-appraisal may account for lack of worry-related performance differences. Findings suggest that when employing problem-solving interventions with a high worry population, emphasis should be placed on changing maladaptive problem attitudes. Nonclinical and clinical populations alike may benefit from incorporating training in concreteness in problem-solving therapy.
METHODS: A 2 (group: high worry, n = 68, vs. low worry, n = 66) X 2 (induction type: worry vs. neutral mentation) factorial design was employed to investigate the differential effects of state worry, and neutral mentation for comparison, on performance-based problem-solving effectiveness. Independent samples t-tests tested for group differences in self-reported problem-solving attitudes. Multiple regression analyses were used to investigate if aforementioned processes predict problem-solving effectiveness.
RESULTS: Previous findings that individuals with high trait worry endorse greater tendencies to self-report unconstructive problem-solving attitudes were replicated. Contrary to predictions, there were no significant within or between group differences on problem-solving performance. Concreteness of problem solutions was the only consistent predictor of problem-solving effectiveness.
LIMITATIONS: Study did not directly assess problem-solving for personal problems.
CONCLUSIONS: Disparities in self-appraisal may account for lack of worry-related performance differences. Findings suggest that when employing problem-solving interventions with a high worry population, emphasis should be placed on changing maladaptive problem attitudes. Nonclinical and clinical populations alike may benefit from incorporating training in concreteness in problem-solving therapy.