Expectancy violation during exposure therapy: A pilot randomized controlled trial

Jennifer L. Buchholz , Shannon M. Blakey , Samantha N. Hellberg , Maya Massing-Schaffer , Lillian Reuman , Heidi Ojalehto , Joe Friedman , Jonathan S. Abramowitz
{"title":"Expectancy violation during exposure therapy: A pilot randomized controlled trial","authors":"Jennifer L. Buchholz ,&nbsp;Shannon M. Blakey ,&nbsp;Samantha N. Hellberg ,&nbsp;Maya Massing-Schaffer ,&nbsp;Lillian Reuman ,&nbsp;Heidi Ojalehto ,&nbsp;Joe Friedman ,&nbsp;Jonathan S. Abramowitz","doi":"10.1016/j.jbct.2021.12.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><span><span>Despite empirical support for the efficacy of exposure-based therapy for anxiety-related disorders, many individuals do not respond to this intervention or else experience a return of fear after treatment. Inhibitory learning theory has informed novel approaches to exposure therapy delivery that aim to improve both short- and long-term outcomes. One exposure optimization strategy is to maximize expectancy violation (i.e., the difference between expected and actual outcomes), which is thought to strengthen inhibitory (i.e., non-threat) associations and enhance long-term fear extinction. In practice, exposure therapy is traditionally preceded by cognitive restructuring to lessen the magnitude of harm expectancies. Yet this technique may restrict the discrepancy between expected and actual outcomes, thus reducing the potency of exposure and limiting the durability of treatment gains. The present study examined the effects of manipulating the timing of cognitive techniques during exposure-based therapy by randomly assigning 45 participants with </span>spider phobia to one of three conditions: (a) cognitive restructuring before exposure (CR-EXP; </span><em>n</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->15), (b) exposure before cognitive restructuring (EXP-CR; <em>n</em> <!-->=<!--> <span>15), and (c) stress management control (SM; </span><em>n</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->15). Although both CR-EXP and EXP-CR were more effective than SM, there were no significant differences between CR-EXP and EXP-CR on measures of fear, avoidance, spider-related cognitions, or change in harm expectancy. Clinical implications, study limitations, and future directions are discussed.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":36022,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Behavioral and Cognitive Therapy","volume":"32 1","pages":"Pages 13-24"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Behavioral and Cognitive Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589979121000524","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Despite empirical support for the efficacy of exposure-based therapy for anxiety-related disorders, many individuals do not respond to this intervention or else experience a return of fear after treatment. Inhibitory learning theory has informed novel approaches to exposure therapy delivery that aim to improve both short- and long-term outcomes. One exposure optimization strategy is to maximize expectancy violation (i.e., the difference between expected and actual outcomes), which is thought to strengthen inhibitory (i.e., non-threat) associations and enhance long-term fear extinction. In practice, exposure therapy is traditionally preceded by cognitive restructuring to lessen the magnitude of harm expectancies. Yet this technique may restrict the discrepancy between expected and actual outcomes, thus reducing the potency of exposure and limiting the durability of treatment gains. The present study examined the effects of manipulating the timing of cognitive techniques during exposure-based therapy by randomly assigning 45 participants with spider phobia to one of three conditions: (a) cognitive restructuring before exposure (CR-EXP; n = 15), (b) exposure before cognitive restructuring (EXP-CR; n = 15), and (c) stress management control (SM; n = 15). Although both CR-EXP and EXP-CR were more effective than SM, there were no significant differences between CR-EXP and EXP-CR on measures of fear, avoidance, spider-related cognitions, or change in harm expectancy. Clinical implications, study limitations, and future directions are discussed.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
暴露治疗期间的预期违反:一项随机对照试验
尽管经验支持暴露疗法对焦虑相关障碍的疗效,但许多个体对这种干预没有反应,或者在治疗后经历恐惧的回归。抑制性学习理论为暴露治疗提供了新的方法,旨在改善短期和长期的结果。一种暴露优化策略是最大化期望违反(即预期结果与实际结果之间的差异),这被认为可以加强抑制(即无威胁)关联并增强长期恐惧消退。在实践中,暴露疗法传统上是通过认知重组来减少伤害预期的程度。然而,这种技术可能会限制预期结果与实际结果之间的差异,从而降低暴露的效力并限制治疗效果的持久性。本研究通过将45名蜘蛛恐惧症患者随机分配到以下三种情况中的一种,研究了在暴露治疗中操纵认知技术时间的效果:(a)暴露前认知重构(CR-EXP;n = 15), (b)认知重构前暴露(EXP-CR);n = 15), (c)应力管理控制(SM;n = 15)。虽然CR-EXP和EXP-CR都比SM更有效,但CR-EXP和EXP-CR在恐惧、回避、蜘蛛相关认知或伤害预期变化方面没有显著差异。本文讨论了临床意义、研究局限性和未来发展方向。
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 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Behavioral and Cognitive Therapy
Journal of Behavioral and Cognitive Therapy Psychology-Clinical Psychology
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
38
审稿时长
60 days
期刊最新文献
Efficacy of online mental health education on occupational burnout among medical staff Analyzing data in single-case experimental designs: Objectives and available software options The effectiveness of cognitive behavioral therapy in mental health problems of children and adolescents in child protection system: A meta-analysis Assessing user acceptance of a mental health app & its impact on depression and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder related knowledge: A mixed method experimental study Morphological changes and body representation: A study of the link between weight cycling and body schema disturbances
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1