Predictors of polyregulation and its effectiveness following exposure to One's most personally distressing intrusive thought

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q3 PSYCHIATRY
Katharine E. Daniel , Sabine Wilhelm , Ryan J. Jacoby
{"title":"Predictors of polyregulation and its effectiveness following exposure to One's most personally distressing intrusive thought","authors":"Katharine E. Daniel ,&nbsp;Sabine Wilhelm ,&nbsp;Ryan J. Jacoby","doi":"10.1016/j.jbtep.2024.102001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background and objectives</h3><div>Using multiple emotion regulation strategies in response to a single stressor—known as polyregulation—is an understudied but common event. The role of polyregulation in psychological disorders characterized by repetitive negative thinking (RNT) is unexplored, despite well-documented difficulties in emotion regulation and strong urges to avoid and escape one's intrusive thoughts in RNT.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Participants (<em>N</em> = 60) either had clinical levels of RNT (<em>n</em> = 15 with worries, <em>n</em> = 14 with ruminations, <em>n</em> = 16 with obsessions) or non-clinical levels of RNT (<em>n</em> = 15) and were exposed to their most personally distressing intrusive thought during an in-lab task. Proportional odds logistic regressions were used to test if RNT group and situation-level factors predicted greater polyregulation following the thought exposure. Multilevel regressions were used to test the short-term effectiveness of polyregulation on subjective distress and psychophysiological responding (heart rate, skin conductance).</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Ninety percent of participants reported using two or more strategies following intrusive thought exposure. Extent of polyregulation was not significantly predicted by RNT group, most situation-level factors, or short-term regulatory effectiveness. Endorsing a greater need to control one's intrusive thought did, however, predict use of more strategies.</div></div><div><h3>Limitations</h3><div>This is a secondary analysis in a small sample.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Given treatments for psychological disorders characterized by RNT attempt to disrupt the connection between a person's urge to control their distressing thoughts and efforts to escape or avoid those thoughts, continued investigation into the role of polyregulation in intrusive thinking may guide clinical intervention.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48198,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry","volume":"86 ","pages":"Article 102001"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0005791624000600","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and objectives

Using multiple emotion regulation strategies in response to a single stressor—known as polyregulation—is an understudied but common event. The role of polyregulation in psychological disorders characterized by repetitive negative thinking (RNT) is unexplored, despite well-documented difficulties in emotion regulation and strong urges to avoid and escape one's intrusive thoughts in RNT.

Methods

Participants (N = 60) either had clinical levels of RNT (n = 15 with worries, n = 14 with ruminations, n = 16 with obsessions) or non-clinical levels of RNT (n = 15) and were exposed to their most personally distressing intrusive thought during an in-lab task. Proportional odds logistic regressions were used to test if RNT group and situation-level factors predicted greater polyregulation following the thought exposure. Multilevel regressions were used to test the short-term effectiveness of polyregulation on subjective distress and psychophysiological responding (heart rate, skin conductance).

Results

Ninety percent of participants reported using two or more strategies following intrusive thought exposure. Extent of polyregulation was not significantly predicted by RNT group, most situation-level factors, or short-term regulatory effectiveness. Endorsing a greater need to control one's intrusive thought did, however, predict use of more strategies.

Limitations

This is a secondary analysis in a small sample.

Conclusion

Given treatments for psychological disorders characterized by RNT attempt to disrupt the connection between a person's urge to control their distressing thoughts and efforts to escape or avoid those thoughts, continued investigation into the role of polyregulation in intrusive thinking may guide clinical intervention.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
5.60%
发文量
48
期刊介绍: The publication of the book Psychotherapy by Reciprocal Inhibition (1958) by the co-founding editor of this Journal, Joseph Wolpe, marked a major change in the understanding and treatment of mental disorders. The book used principles from empirical behavioral science to explain psychopathological phenomena and the resulting explanations were critically tested and used to derive effective treatments. The second half of the 20th century saw this rigorous scientific approach come to fruition. Experimental approaches to psychopathology, in particular those used to test conditioning theories and cognitive theories, have steadily expanded, and experimental analysis of processes characterising and maintaining mental disorders have become an established research area.
×
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