恐惧症的认知治疗。

C G Last
{"title":"恐惧症的认知治疗。","authors":"C G Last","doi":"10.1016/b978-0-12-535616-9.50007-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Despite the seeming phenomenological importance of maladaptive cognitions in phobic disorders, review of the literature does not support the utilization of cognitive treatments with this client population. Although preliminary analog investigations yielded promising findings, studies employing clinical phobics as subjects suggest that cognitive techniques are relatively ineffective when administered alone, when compared to standard behavioral treatment. In addition, cognitive treatments appear to be of no additional therapeutic value when combined with behavioral techniques. Several possible reasons for this poor showing of cognitive treatments have been reviewed. While it is plausible that cognitive modification was not actually achieved in treatment outcome studies, failure to measure cognitive change precludes evaluation of this hypothesis. However, because preliminary evidence suggests the unreliability of cognitive assessment procedures, substantially more research will need to address the development of psychometrically sound cognitive measurement techniques before cognitive change can be evaluated in future investigations. Given the failure of cognitive treatments with phobics, what directions remain for future research in this area? While many would argue against conducting any further research, it appears that several important issues remain to be explored, the results of which may have a profound impact on our current understanding and delivery of behavior therapy to phobic clients. As mentioned above, the development and utilization of reliable and valid cognitive measures are critical to evaluation of the efficacy of cognitive treatments. As such, the utility and psychometric properties of more structured cognitive measures (e.g., self-efficacy ratings, attitudinal scales), as well as specific cognitive measures delineated in this article, need to be investigated. The use of these measures in future investigations will aid in determining whether, and which, cognitive therapies actually engender constructive cognitive change. Such studies must be conducted before cognitive techniques can be dismissed as ineffective. Similarly, cognitive measurement also should be used to assess cognitive changes during behavioral, exposure-based treatment of phobias. Although exposure treatments clearly are considered to be the treatment of choice for phobic disorders (Marks, 1978; Mavissakalian & Barlow, 1981), the process or mechanism of action by which exposure works remains unclear. Systematic testing of alternative hypotheses, including cognitive change, may shed light on this complicated issue and aid in increasing the efficacy of our present treatment</p>","PeriodicalId":77598,"journal":{"name":"Progress in behavior modification","volume":"16 ","pages":"65-82"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1984-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cognitive treatment of phobia.\",\"authors\":\"C G Last\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/b978-0-12-535616-9.50007-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Despite the seeming phenomenological importance of maladaptive cognitions in phobic disorders, review of the literature does not support the utilization of cognitive treatments with this client population. Although preliminary analog investigations yielded promising findings, studies employing clinical phobics as subjects suggest that cognitive techniques are relatively ineffective when administered alone, when compared to standard behavioral treatment. In addition, cognitive treatments appear to be of no additional therapeutic value when combined with behavioral techniques. Several possible reasons for this poor showing of cognitive treatments have been reviewed. While it is plausible that cognitive modification was not actually achieved in treatment outcome studies, failure to measure cognitive change precludes evaluation of this hypothesis. However, because preliminary evidence suggests the unreliability of cognitive assessment procedures, substantially more research will need to address the development of psychometrically sound cognitive measurement techniques before cognitive change can be evaluated in future investigations. Given the failure of cognitive treatments with phobics, what directions remain for future research in this area? While many would argue against conducting any further research, it appears that several important issues remain to be explored, the results of which may have a profound impact on our current understanding and delivery of behavior therapy to phobic clients. As mentioned above, the development and utilization of reliable and valid cognitive measures are critical to evaluation of the efficacy of cognitive treatments. As such, the utility and psychometric properties of more structured cognitive measures (e.g., self-efficacy ratings, attitudinal scales), as well as specific cognitive measures delineated in this article, need to be investigated. The use of these measures in future investigations will aid in determining whether, and which, cognitive therapies actually engender constructive cognitive change. Such studies must be conducted before cognitive techniques can be dismissed as ineffective. Similarly, cognitive measurement also should be used to assess cognitive changes during behavioral, exposure-based treatment of phobias. Although exposure treatments clearly are considered to be the treatment of choice for phobic disorders (Marks, 1978; Mavissakalian & Barlow, 1981), the process or mechanism of action by which exposure works remains unclear. Systematic testing of alternative hypotheses, including cognitive change, may shed light on this complicated issue and aid in increasing the efficacy of our present treatment</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":77598,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Progress in behavior modification\",\"volume\":\"16 \",\"pages\":\"65-82\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1984-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Progress in behavior modification\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-535616-9.50007-9\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Progress in behavior modification","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-535616-9.50007-9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

尽管在恐惧障碍中,认知适应不良似乎具有现象学上的重要性,但回顾文献并不支持对这类客户群体使用认知治疗。虽然初步的模拟调查产生了有希望的结果,但采用临床恐惧症作为研究对象的研究表明,与标准行为治疗相比,单独使用认知技术相对无效。此外,当认知疗法与行为疗法相结合时,似乎没有额外的治疗价值。对认知治疗效果不佳的几个可能原因进行了综述。虽然在治疗结果研究中,认知改变并没有真正实现是合理的,但未能测量认知变化排除了对这一假设的评估。然而,由于初步证据表明认知评估程序的不可靠性,在未来的调查中可以评估认知变化之前,需要进行更多的研究来解决心理测量学上健全的认知测量技术的发展问题。鉴于认知治疗恐惧症的失败,这一领域未来的研究方向是什么?虽然许多人反对进行任何进一步的研究,但似乎有几个重要的问题仍有待探索,其结果可能会对我们目前对恐惧症患者的理解和行为治疗产生深远的影响。如上所述,开发和使用可靠有效的认知测量方法对于评估认知治疗的疗效至关重要。因此,需要对更结构化的认知测量(例如,自我效能评级,态度量表)以及本文中描述的特定认知测量的效用和心理测量特性进行研究。在未来的研究中使用这些措施将有助于确定认知疗法是否以及哪些疗法实际上会产生建设性的认知变化。在认知技术被认为无效之前,必须进行这样的研究。同样,认知测量也应该用于评估在行为的、基于暴露的恐惧症治疗过程中的认知变化。尽管暴露疗法显然被认为是恐惧症的治疗选择(Marks, 1978;Mavissakalian & Barlow, 1981),暴露作用的过程或机制尚不清楚。对包括认知变化在内的其他假设进行系统的测试,可能会揭示这个复杂的问题,并有助于提高我们目前治疗的效果
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Cognitive treatment of phobia.

Despite the seeming phenomenological importance of maladaptive cognitions in phobic disorders, review of the literature does not support the utilization of cognitive treatments with this client population. Although preliminary analog investigations yielded promising findings, studies employing clinical phobics as subjects suggest that cognitive techniques are relatively ineffective when administered alone, when compared to standard behavioral treatment. In addition, cognitive treatments appear to be of no additional therapeutic value when combined with behavioral techniques. Several possible reasons for this poor showing of cognitive treatments have been reviewed. While it is plausible that cognitive modification was not actually achieved in treatment outcome studies, failure to measure cognitive change precludes evaluation of this hypothesis. However, because preliminary evidence suggests the unreliability of cognitive assessment procedures, substantially more research will need to address the development of psychometrically sound cognitive measurement techniques before cognitive change can be evaluated in future investigations. Given the failure of cognitive treatments with phobics, what directions remain for future research in this area? While many would argue against conducting any further research, it appears that several important issues remain to be explored, the results of which may have a profound impact on our current understanding and delivery of behavior therapy to phobic clients. As mentioned above, the development and utilization of reliable and valid cognitive measures are critical to evaluation of the efficacy of cognitive treatments. As such, the utility and psychometric properties of more structured cognitive measures (e.g., self-efficacy ratings, attitudinal scales), as well as specific cognitive measures delineated in this article, need to be investigated. The use of these measures in future investigations will aid in determining whether, and which, cognitive therapies actually engender constructive cognitive change. Such studies must be conducted before cognitive techniques can be dismissed as ineffective. Similarly, cognitive measurement also should be used to assess cognitive changes during behavioral, exposure-based treatment of phobias. Although exposure treatments clearly are considered to be the treatment of choice for phobic disorders (Marks, 1978; Mavissakalian & Barlow, 1981), the process or mechanism of action by which exposure works remains unclear. Systematic testing of alternative hypotheses, including cognitive change, may shed light on this complicated issue and aid in increasing the efficacy of our present treatment

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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