The standalone effect of safety behavior manipulations: A systematic review and meta-analysis

IF 11.2 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Clinical Psychology Review Pub Date : 2026-03-01 Epub Date: 2026-01-16 DOI:10.1016/j.cpr.2026.102703
Jason T. Goodson , Tapan A. Patel , James M. Zech , Matthew C. Sala , Jesse R. Cougle
{"title":"The standalone effect of safety behavior manipulations: A systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"Jason T. Goodson ,&nbsp;Tapan A. Patel ,&nbsp;James M. Zech ,&nbsp;Matthew C. Sala ,&nbsp;Jesse R. Cougle","doi":"10.1016/j.cpr.2026.102703","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Safety behaviors are maladaptive behavioral and mental strategies individuals may employ to prevent or avoid a negative symptom. While reducing safety behaviors have been a core component of cognitive-behavioral treatments, recent research has begun examining the efficacy of standalone safety behavior manipulations. Some have examined the effect of increasing the behaviors in a non-treatment experimental context while others have examined the effect of reducing these behaviors in both non-treatment and treatment contexts. In this systematic review and meta-analysis we examined the efficacy of these manipulations. A total of 26 studies were included in our review and 19 were eligible for our meta-analyses. We examined the effect of safety behavior manipulations on both safety behavior frequency and the primary symptoms within the studies. We found that relative to control, safety behavior reduction led to significantly greater reductions in safety behaviors (<em>d</em> = 0.52, 95% CI [0.36, 0.68]) and symptoms (<em>d</em> = 0.43, 95% CI [0.27, 0.59]). We also found that relative to control, safety behavior increase conditions led to significantly greater safety behaviors (<em>d</em> = 2.96, 95% CI [2.14, 3.78]) and clinical symptoms (<em>d</em> = 0.65, 95% CI [0.46, 0.83]). Some moderators emerged, and evidence of publication bias was found. Altogether, the present study provides support for the potential role safety behaviors may play in a range of disorders. Further, standalone manipulations targeting safety behaviors may be an efficacious method of reducing symptoms of psychopathology, but further research will be necessary to better understand the efficacy of this approach.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48458,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Psychology Review","volume":"124 ","pages":"Article 102703"},"PeriodicalIF":11.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272735826000127","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Safety behaviors are maladaptive behavioral and mental strategies individuals may employ to prevent or avoid a negative symptom. While reducing safety behaviors have been a core component of cognitive-behavioral treatments, recent research has begun examining the efficacy of standalone safety behavior manipulations. Some have examined the effect of increasing the behaviors in a non-treatment experimental context while others have examined the effect of reducing these behaviors in both non-treatment and treatment contexts. In this systematic review and meta-analysis we examined the efficacy of these manipulations. A total of 26 studies were included in our review and 19 were eligible for our meta-analyses. We examined the effect of safety behavior manipulations on both safety behavior frequency and the primary symptoms within the studies. We found that relative to control, safety behavior reduction led to significantly greater reductions in safety behaviors (d = 0.52, 95% CI [0.36, 0.68]) and symptoms (d = 0.43, 95% CI [0.27, 0.59]). We also found that relative to control, safety behavior increase conditions led to significantly greater safety behaviors (d = 2.96, 95% CI [2.14, 3.78]) and clinical symptoms (d = 0.65, 95% CI [0.46, 0.83]). Some moderators emerged, and evidence of publication bias was found. Altogether, the present study provides support for the potential role safety behaviors may play in a range of disorders. Further, standalone manipulations targeting safety behaviors may be an efficacious method of reducing symptoms of psychopathology, but further research will be necessary to better understand the efficacy of this approach.
安全行为操纵的独立效应:系统回顾和荟萃分析
安全行为是一种适应不良的行为和心理策略,个体可以用来预防或避免消极症状。虽然减少安全行为一直是认知行为治疗的核心组成部分,但最近的研究已经开始检查独立安全行为操作的效果。一些人研究了在非治疗实验环境中增加这些行为的效果,而另一些人研究了在非治疗和治疗环境中减少这些行为的效果。在本系统综述和荟萃分析中,我们检查了这些操作的有效性。我们的综述共纳入了26项研究,其中19项符合meta分析的条件。我们在研究中检查了安全行为操作对安全行为频率和主要症状的影响。我们发现,相对于对照组,安全行为减少导致安全行为(d = 0.52, 95% CI[0.36, 0.68])和症状(d = 0.43, 95% CI[0.27, 0.59])显著更大的减少。我们还发现,相对于对照组,安全行为增加条件导致安全行为(d = 2.96, 95% CI[2.14, 3.78])和临床症状(d = 0.65, 95% CI[0.46, 0.83])显著增加。出现了一些审查员,发现了发表偏倚的证据。总之,本研究为安全行为在一系列障碍中可能发挥的潜在作用提供了支持。此外,针对安全行为的独立操作可能是减轻精神病理症状的有效方法,但需要进一步的研究来更好地了解这种方法的功效。
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
Clinical Psychology Review
Clinical Psychology Review PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
23.10
自引率
1.60%
发文量
65
期刊介绍: Clinical Psychology Review serves as a platform for substantial reviews addressing pertinent topics in clinical psychology. Encompassing a spectrum of issues, from psychopathology to behavior therapy, cognition to cognitive therapies, behavioral medicine to community mental health, assessment, and child development, the journal seeks cutting-edge papers that significantly contribute to advancing the science and/or practice of clinical psychology. While maintaining a primary focus on topics directly related to clinical psychology, the journal occasionally features reviews on psychophysiology, learning therapy, experimental psychopathology, and social psychology, provided they demonstrate a clear connection to research or practice in clinical psychology. Integrative literature reviews and summaries of innovative ongoing clinical research programs find a place within its pages. However, reports on individual research studies and theoretical treatises or clinical guides lacking an empirical base are deemed inappropriate for publication.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书