Polanco-Roman Lillian, Jurska Justyna, Quiñones Victoria, Miranda Regina
Arch Suicide Res. 2015;19(3):350-65. doi: 10.1080/13811118.2014.981623. Epub 2014 Dec 17.
The present study examined the relation between cognitive response styles (i.e., brooding, reflection, distraction) and cognitive inflexibility in differentially predicting history of non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) only, suicide attempt (SA) only, or both (NSSI + SA). College students (N = 352) completed self-report measures of rumination, distraction, and self-harm history, a diagnostic interview, and a computerized task measuring cognitive flexibility. Brooding uniquely predicted SA-only history, while reflection uniquely predicted history of NSSI-only and NSSI + SA. Distraction was associated with lower odds of NSSI-only and NSSI + SA. Cognitive inflexibility was not significantly associated with self-harm history. Cognitive vulnerabilities may help identify individuals who are at risk for self-harm and may differentiate between NSSI and SA.
本研究考察了认知反应方式(即沉思、反思、分心)与认知灵活性之间的关系,这些因素在差异预测仅非自杀性自伤史(NSSI)、仅自杀未遂史(SA)或两者兼有的情况(NSSI + SA)时的作用。352名大学生完成了关于沉思、分心和自伤史的自我报告测量、一次诊断访谈以及一项测量认知灵活性的计算机任务。沉思独特地预测了仅自杀未遂史,而反思则独特地预测了仅非自杀性自伤史和非自杀性自伤史与自杀未遂史兼有情况。分心与仅非自杀性自伤史和非自杀性自伤史与自杀未遂史兼有情况的较低几率相关。认知灵活性与自伤史没有显著关联。认知脆弱性可能有助于识别有自伤风险的个体,并区分非自杀性自伤和自杀未遂情况。