Páez-Blarrina Marisa, Luciano Carmen, Gutiérrez-Martínez Olga, Valdivia Sonsoles, Rodríguez-Valverde Miguel, Ortega Jose
Spanish Association Against Cancer, Almería, Spain.
Behav Modif. 2008 May;32(3):403-22. doi: 10.1177/0145445507309029.
This study compares the effect of an acceptance-based protocol (ACT) and a cognitive control-based (CONT) protocol on three measures of pain coping: tolerance, self-report, and believability. Specific methodological controls were employed to further isolate the role of the value of participating in a pain task, compared to previous investigations on the alteration of the function of aversive stimulation. Twenty participants were randomly assigned to one of the conditions (ACT vs. CONT), and a pre-post design was used. In the ACT condition, the protocol established a relation of coordination between the pain-related thoughts and the actions in the valued direction. In the CONT condition, the protocol established a relation of opposition between the same aspects. Results show an increase in pain tolerance and a reduction of self-reported pain at posttest for both conditions. However, ACT participants showed significantly lower believability of pain than did CONT participants. Conceptual and clinical implications are discussed.
本研究比较了基于接纳的方案(ACT)和基于认知控制的方案(CONT)对疼痛应对的三个指标的影响:耐受性、自我报告和可信度。与之前关于厌恶刺激功能改变的研究相比,采用了特定的方法学控制措施,以进一步分离参与疼痛任务的价值所起的作用。20名参与者被随机分配到其中一种条件下(ACT组与CONT组),并采用前后测设计。在ACT条件下,该方案在与疼痛相关的想法和朝着有价值方向的行动之间建立了一种协调关系。在CONT条件下,该方案在相同方面之间建立了一种对立关系。结果显示,两种条件下在后测时疼痛耐受性均有所提高,自我报告的疼痛均有所减轻。然而,ACT组参与者的疼痛可信度显著低于CONT组参与者。文中讨论了相关的概念和临床意义。