Coping with emotional pain: An experimental comparison of acceptance vs. avoidance coping

IF 3.4 3区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Pinelopi Konstantinou , Andria Trigeorgi , Chryssis Georgiou , Michalis Michaelides , Andrew T. Gloster , Louise McHugh , Georgia Panayiotou , Maria Karekla
{"title":"Coping with emotional pain: An experimental comparison of acceptance vs. avoidance coping","authors":"Pinelopi Konstantinou ,&nbsp;Andria Trigeorgi ,&nbsp;Chryssis Georgiou ,&nbsp;Michalis Michaelides ,&nbsp;Andrew T. Gloster ,&nbsp;Louise McHugh ,&nbsp;Georgia Panayiotou ,&nbsp;Maria Karekla","doi":"10.1016/j.jcbs.2024.100820","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The present study compared multi-methodically and multi-dimensionally the effects of acceptance and avoidance coping with emotional pain, both between and within-group. Convenience sampling was used, with 88 participants included (81.8% females; <em>Mage =</em> 21.75 years) and being randomly assigned to one of two instructed groups: (a) Acceptance followed by avoidance of pain sensations and thoughts, and (b) Avoidance followed by acceptance. All participants underwent an emotional pain induction procedure three times involving negative autobiographical recall and an emotional-pain standardized script. In the first emotion induction, no instructions were given whereas in the other two, participants were instructed to use the techniques they were trained in. On both autobiographical and emotional-pain script tasks, participants who used firstly avoidance and secondly acceptance exhibited significantly lower mean heart rate and higher mean heart rate variability RR index across time. Also, in the last emotional pain induction, on both tasks, acceptance resulted in lower physiological activation than avoidance. No significant differences were found for the self-report of negative affect. Overall, acceptance vs. avoidance differences were mostly found in the physiological outcomes, suggesting the importance of including objective measures when examining coping techniques. Our findings suggest that ACT's concept of creative hopelessness is supported, as participants may have to use firstly use ineffective coping strategies to better understand what methods are most effective for managing pain. To our knowledge, this study is the first study to compare acceptance vs. avoidance coping with emotional pain both between and within-group, using a multi-method and multi-dimensional approach.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47544,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212144724001005","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The present study compared multi-methodically and multi-dimensionally the effects of acceptance and avoidance coping with emotional pain, both between and within-group. Convenience sampling was used, with 88 participants included (81.8% females; Mage = 21.75 years) and being randomly assigned to one of two instructed groups: (a) Acceptance followed by avoidance of pain sensations and thoughts, and (b) Avoidance followed by acceptance. All participants underwent an emotional pain induction procedure three times involving negative autobiographical recall and an emotional-pain standardized script. In the first emotion induction, no instructions were given whereas in the other two, participants were instructed to use the techniques they were trained in. On both autobiographical and emotional-pain script tasks, participants who used firstly avoidance and secondly acceptance exhibited significantly lower mean heart rate and higher mean heart rate variability RR index across time. Also, in the last emotional pain induction, on both tasks, acceptance resulted in lower physiological activation than avoidance. No significant differences were found for the self-report of negative affect. Overall, acceptance vs. avoidance differences were mostly found in the physiological outcomes, suggesting the importance of including objective measures when examining coping techniques. Our findings suggest that ACT's concept of creative hopelessness is supported, as participants may have to use firstly use ineffective coping strategies to better understand what methods are most effective for managing pain. To our knowledge, this study is the first study to compare acceptance vs. avoidance coping with emotional pain both between and within-group, using a multi-method and multi-dimensional approach.

应对情感痛苦:接受与回避应对的实验比较
本研究采用多种方法,从多个维度比较了接受和回避情绪痛苦应对方法在组间和组内的效果。研究采用便利抽样法,88 名参与者(81.8% 为女性;年龄 = 21.75 岁)被随机分配到两个指导小组中的一个:(a) 接受后回避疼痛感觉和想法组;(b) 回避后接受组。所有参与者都接受了三次情绪疼痛诱导过程,包括负面自传回忆和情绪疼痛标准化脚本。在第一次情绪诱导中,参与者没有接受任何指导,而在另外两次情绪诱导中,参与者则被指导使用他们接受过训练的技巧。在自传和情绪-疼痛脚本任务中,首先使用回避法和其次使用接受法的参与者在不同时间段的平均心率和平均心率变异RR指数都明显较低。此外,在最后的情绪痛苦诱导中,在这两项任务中,接受比回避导致的生理激活更低。在消极情绪的自我报告中没有发现明显的差异。总的来说,接受与回避的差异主要体现在生理结果上,这表明在研究应对技巧时,客观测量的重要性。我们的研究结果表明,ACT 的 "创造性无望 "概念得到了支持,因为参与者可能必须首先使用无效的应对策略,才能更好地了解哪些方法对控制疼痛最有效。据我们所知,本研究是第一项采用多方法和多维度方法,在组间和组内比较接受与回避情绪疼痛应对方法的研究。
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
8.50
自引率
18.00%
发文量
82
审稿时长
61 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science is the official journal of the Association for Contextual Behavioral Science (ACBS). Contextual Behavioral Science is a systematic and pragmatic approach to the understanding of behavior, the solution of human problems, and the promotion of human growth and development. Contextual Behavioral Science uses functional principles and theories to analyze and modify action embedded in its historical and situational context. The goal is to predict and influence behavior, with precision, scope, and depth, across all behavioral domains and all levels of analysis, so as to help create a behavioral science that is more adequate to the challenge of the human condition.
×
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