在治疗神经习惯方面，偶发性与非偶发性竞争性反应练习的比较。

A comparison of contingent vs non-contingent competing response practice in the treatment of nervous habits.

作者信息

Miltenberger R G, Fuqua R W

出版信息

J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry. 1985 Sep;16(3):195-200. doi: 10.1016/0005-7916(85)90063-1.

Abstract

Previous research found that two components of the habit reversal procedure, the practice of a competing response (CR) and awareness training, suppressed muscle tics to the same degree as Azrin's entire habit reversal program. This study compared the effectiveness of two variations of the competing response procedure (contingent vs non-contingent practice) on the nervous habits of nine subjects. The results showed the non-contingent competing response to be largely ineffective in decreasing the target behaviors. The contingent competing response procedure greatly reduced the nervous habits of most subjects, and the complete habit reversal procedure further decreased the behavior for two subjects. This research indicates that the competing response procedure is most effective when used in a contingent fashion.

摘要

先前的研究发现，习惯逆转程序的两个组成部分，即对抗反应（CR）练习和意识训练，对肌肉抽搐的抑制程度与阿兹林的整个习惯逆转程序相同。本研究比较了对抗反应程序的两种变体（应急练习与非应急练习）对九名受试者紧张习惯的效果。结果表明，非应急对抗反应在减少目标行为方面基本无效。应急对抗反应程序极大地减少了大多数受试者的紧张习惯，而完整的习惯逆转程序进一步减少了两名受试者的行为。这项研究表明，对抗反应程序以应急方式使用时最为有效。