Threat, safety, safeness and social safeness 30 years on: Fundamental dimensions and distinctions for mental health and well-being

IF 4.3 3区 材料科学 Q1 ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC
Paul Gilbert
{"title":"Threat, safety, safeness and social safeness 30 years on: Fundamental dimensions and distinctions for mental health and well-being","authors":"Paul Gilbert","doi":"10.1111/bjc.12466","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In 1993, the <i>British Journal of Clinical Psychology</i> published my paper titled ‘Defence and safety: Their function in social behaviour and psychopathology’. The paper highlights that to understand people's sensitivity to threat, we also need to understand their ability to identify what is safe. This paper offers an update on these concepts, highlighting distinctions that were implicit but not clearly defined at the time. Hence, the paper seeks to clarify distinctions between: (i) threat detection and response, (ii) safety and safety seeking, (iii) safeness and (iv) their social and non-social functions and forms. Threat detection and response are to prevent or minimize harm (e.g., run from a predator or fire). Safety checking relates to monitoring for the absence and avoidance of threat, while safety seeking links to the destination of the defensive behaviour (e.g., running home). Safety seeking also relates to maintaining vigilance to the appearance of potential harms and doing things believed to avoid harm. Threat-defending and safety checking and seeking are regulated primarily through evolved threat processing systems that monitor the nature, presence, controllability and/or absence of threat (e.g., amygdala and sympathetic nervous system). Safeness uses different monitoring systems via different psychophysiological systems (e.g., prefrontal cortex, parasympathetic system) for the <i>presence</i> of internal and external resources that support threat-coping, risk-taking, resource exploration. Creating brain states that recruit safeness processing can impact how standard evidence-based therapies (e.g., exposure, distress tolerance and reappraisal) are experienced and produce long-term change.</p>","PeriodicalId":3,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/bjc.12466","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjc.12466","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In 1993, the British Journal of Clinical Psychology published my paper titled ‘Defence and safety: Their function in social behaviour and psychopathology’. The paper highlights that to understand people's sensitivity to threat, we also need to understand their ability to identify what is safe. This paper offers an update on these concepts, highlighting distinctions that were implicit but not clearly defined at the time. Hence, the paper seeks to clarify distinctions between: (i) threat detection and response, (ii) safety and safety seeking, (iii) safeness and (iv) their social and non-social functions and forms. Threat detection and response are to prevent or minimize harm (e.g., run from a predator or fire). Safety checking relates to monitoring for the absence and avoidance of threat, while safety seeking links to the destination of the defensive behaviour (e.g., running home). Safety seeking also relates to maintaining vigilance to the appearance of potential harms and doing things believed to avoid harm. Threat-defending and safety checking and seeking are regulated primarily through evolved threat processing systems that monitor the nature, presence, controllability and/or absence of threat (e.g., amygdala and sympathetic nervous system). Safeness uses different monitoring systems via different psychophysiological systems (e.g., prefrontal cortex, parasympathetic system) for the presence of internal and external resources that support threat-coping, risk-taking, resource exploration. Creating brain states that recruit safeness processing can impact how standard evidence-based therapies (e.g., exposure, distress tolerance and reappraisal) are experienced and produce long-term change.

Abstract Image

威胁、安全、安全和社会安全 30 年后的今天:心理健康与幸福的基本维度和区别
1993 年,《英国临床心理学杂志》发表了我的论文《防御与安全:它们在社会行为和精神病理学中的功能》。该论文强调,要了解人们对威胁的敏感性,我们还需要了解他们识别安全事物的能力。本文对这些概念进行了更新,强调了当时隐含但未明确定义的区别。因此,本文试图厘清以下概念之间的区别:(i) 威胁侦测与应对;(ii) 安全与寻求安全;(iii) 安全性;(iv) 它们的社会和非社会功能与形式。威胁探测和反应是为了防止或尽量减少伤害(例如,逃离捕食者或火灾)。安全检查与监测是否存在威胁和避免威胁有关,而寻求安全则与防卫行为的目的地有关(如跑回家)。寻求安全也是指对潜在伤害的出现保持警惕,并做一些认为可以避免伤害的事情。威胁防御、安全检查和寻求主要通过进化的威胁处理系统来调节,这些系统监测威胁的性质、存在、可控性和/或不存在(如杏仁核和交感神经系统)。安全感则通过不同的心理生理系统(如前额叶皮层、副交感神经系统)使用不同的监控系统,以监控支持威胁应对、冒险和资源探索的内部和外部资源的存在。创造能够促进安全处理的大脑状态,可以影响标准循证疗法(如暴露疗法、痛苦耐受疗法和重新评估疗法)的体验方式,并产生长期的改变。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
4.30%
发文量
567
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信