Department of Psychology, Toronto Metropolitan University, Canada.
Department of Psychology, Toronto Metropolitan University, Canada.
J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry. 2023 Mar;78:101792. doi: 10.1016/j.jbtep.2022.101792. Epub 2022 Nov 23.
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).
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.
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.
Study did not directly assess problem-solving for personal problems.
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.
本研究调查了高特质焦虑个体与低特质焦虑个体在解决问题态度和基于状态的解决问题能力方面的差异。次要目的涉及调查解决问题的有效性与被假设影响担忧和解决问题的过程(即工作记忆、注意力控制、情绪调节和思维具体性)之间的关系。
采用 2(组:高焦虑,n=68,与低焦虑,n=66)×2(诱导类型:担忧与中性思维)因子设计,以研究状态担忧的差异效应,以及中性思维作为比较,对基于表现的解决问题的有效性的影响。独立样本 t 检验用于检验组间在自我报告的解决问题态度上的差异。多元回归分析用于调查上述过程是否预测解决问题的有效性。
复制了先前的发现,即高特质焦虑个体更倾向于自我报告不具建设性的解决问题态度。与预测相反,在解决问题的表现上,无论是在组内还是组间,都没有显著的差异。问题解决方案的具体性是解决问题有效性的唯一一致预测因素。
研究并未直接评估个人问题的解决问题能力。
自我评估的差异可能解释了与担忧相关的表现差异。研究结果表明,当对高担忧人群实施解决问题的干预时,应重点放在改变适应不良的问题态度上。非临床和临床人群都可能受益于在解决问题治疗中纳入思维具体性的训练。