McMullen Jenny, Barnes-Holmes Dermot, Barnes-Holmes Yvonne, Stewart Ian, Luciano Carmen, Cochrane Andy
Department of Psychology, National University of Ireland, John Hume Building, Maynooth, Ireland.
Behav Res Ther. 2008 Jan;46(1):122-9. doi: 10.1016/j.brat.2007.09.002. Epub 2007 Sep 14.
The current study compared the effects of an acceptance versus distraction rationale on coping with experimentally induced pain. Eighty participants were randomly assigned to one of five conditions: Full-Acceptance, Full-Distraction, Instruction-only-Acceptance, Instruction-only-Distraction and No-Instructions. Participants completed a simple matching task and were intermittently given the choice either to receive an electric shock and continue, or to avoid the shock and terminate the task. Only the Full-Acceptance strategy (that included experiential exercises and a metaphor) had a significant effect on task tolerance as measured by an increase in the number of shocks delivered post-intervention relative to baseline. In addition, the participants in both of the acceptance conditions showed lower levels of believability in that they were more likely to continue with the task even when reporting more pain. The results support the prediction that acceptance-based interventions work by undermining the behavioural-control functions of pain-related thoughts and feelings, and call for a systematic analysis of how metaphors and exercises work in analogue research.
本研究比较了接纳与分心原理对应对实验诱导疼痛的影响。80名参与者被随机分配到以下五种条件之一:完全接纳、完全分心、仅指导接纳、仅指导分心和无指导。参与者完成一项简单的匹配任务,并间歇性地被给予选择,要么接受电击并继续,要么避免电击并终止任务。只有完全接纳策略(包括体验练习和一个隐喻)对任务耐受性有显著影响,干预后相对于基线,电击次数增加表明了这一点。此外,两个接纳条件下的参与者表现出较低的可信度,因为即使报告更多疼痛,他们也更有可能继续任务。结果支持了基于接纳的干预通过破坏与疼痛相关的思想和情感的行为控制功能起作用的预测,并呼吁对隐喻和练习在模拟研究中的作用方式进行系统分析。