McCaul K D, Haugtvedt C
J Pers Soc Psychol. 1982 Jul;43(1):154-62. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.43.1.154.
This article compares the effects of distracting oneself from, versus attending to, the sensations produced by cold-pressor stimulation. Experiment 1 revealed that distraction is a better coping strategy than attention to sensations when subjects are asked to report pain threshold and tolerance. Experiments 2 and 3 examined the hypothesis that distraction is effective because persons hold a commonsense belief in the benefits of distraction as a coping device. Neither experiment supported the commonsense hypothesis as an explanation for the findings of Experiment 1. In a final experiment, subjects were assigned to either a distraction, attention, or no-instructions condition and were asked to report their distress during a 4-minute cold-pressor trial. Distraction reduced distress early in the trial, but attention to sensations proved to be a superior strategy for the last 2 minutes of the trial. It is proposed that distraction and attention to sensations may be differentially effective depending on the duration of the painful stimulus. Possible mediating processes underlying the two strategies are discussed.
本文比较了分散注意力与关注冷加压刺激所产生感觉的效果。实验1表明,当要求受试者报告疼痛阈值和耐受性时,分散注意力比关注感觉是更好的应对策略。实验2和实验3检验了这样一个假设,即分散注意力之所以有效,是因为人们基于常识相信分散注意力作为一种应对手段是有益的。这两个实验均未支持将常识性假设作为对实验1结果的解释。在最后一个实验中,受试者被分配到分散注意力、关注感觉或无指导语的条件下,并被要求在4分钟的冷加压试验中报告他们的痛苦程度。分散注意力在试验早期减轻了痛苦,但在试验的最后2分钟,关注感觉被证明是一种更好的策略。有人提出,分散注意力和关注感觉的效果可能因疼痛刺激的持续时间而异。文中讨论了这两种策略背后可能的中介过程。