Intervention to Change Attributions that are Negative: A Feasibility Study on Reducing Anger after Brain Injury

Dawn Neumann, Samantha Backhaus Backhaus, Jeong-in Jang, Sruthi Bhamadipalli, J. Winegardner, B. Helton, F. Hammond
{"title":"Intervention to Change Attributions that are Negative: A Feasibility Study on Reducing Anger after Brain Injury","authors":"Dawn Neumann, Samantha Backhaus Backhaus, Jeong-in Jang, Sruthi Bhamadipalli, J. Winegardner, B. Helton, F. Hammond","doi":"10.55913/joep.v1i1.5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: Explore the early efficacy of a treatment to modify anger, aggression, negative attributions, and perspective-taking in participants with traumatic brain injury (TBI). Design:  Randomized waitlist-controlled trial. Participants: Twenty-four adults with a TBI (³ 1-year post-injury) who had above average aggression and either negative attribution bias or poor perspective-taking. Intervention: Intervention to Change Attributions that are Negative (ICAN). Measures: Epps Scenarios (attributions of intent, hostility, blame; anger and aggression responses); Aggression Questionnaire (AQ); PROMIS-Anger; Interpersonal Reactivity Index Perspective-taking; and Participant Global Impression of Change (PGIC) for anger and perspective-taking. Results: Twenty-one participants completed the study (ICAN = 8; Waitlist control [WLC] = 13).  Post-treatment, ICAN participants had lower anger responses to Epps Scenarios (p = 0.03) compared to WLC participants who had not yet received treatment. Other between-group comparisons were not significant. Analyses comparing pre/post-intervention changes in the pooled sample (n=21), revealed reduced attributions of intent (p < 0.01) and blame (p = 0.05), and anger (p = 0.01) and aggression responses to Epps scenarios (p < 0.01) after receiving treatment. Post-intervention scores on the AQ and PROMIS-Anger were also significantly reduced (p < 0.01). On the PGIC, 83% and 45% reported noticeable changes in perspective-taking and anger, respectively. Discussion: ICAN may reduce anger and negative attributions after TBI and merits further investigation.","PeriodicalId":73729,"journal":{"name":"Journal of emotion and psychopathology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of emotion and psychopathology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.55913/joep.v1i1.5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Objectives: Explore the early efficacy of a treatment to modify anger, aggression, negative attributions, and perspective-taking in participants with traumatic brain injury (TBI). Design:  Randomized waitlist-controlled trial. Participants: Twenty-four adults with a TBI (³ 1-year post-injury) who had above average aggression and either negative attribution bias or poor perspective-taking. Intervention: Intervention to Change Attributions that are Negative (ICAN). Measures: Epps Scenarios (attributions of intent, hostility, blame; anger and aggression responses); Aggression Questionnaire (AQ); PROMIS-Anger; Interpersonal Reactivity Index Perspective-taking; and Participant Global Impression of Change (PGIC) for anger and perspective-taking. Results: Twenty-one participants completed the study (ICAN = 8; Waitlist control [WLC] = 13).  Post-treatment, ICAN participants had lower anger responses to Epps Scenarios (p = 0.03) compared to WLC participants who had not yet received treatment. Other between-group comparisons were not significant. Analyses comparing pre/post-intervention changes in the pooled sample (n=21), revealed reduced attributions of intent (p < 0.01) and blame (p = 0.05), and anger (p = 0.01) and aggression responses to Epps scenarios (p < 0.01) after receiving treatment. Post-intervention scores on the AQ and PROMIS-Anger were also significantly reduced (p < 0.01). On the PGIC, 83% and 45% reported noticeable changes in perspective-taking and anger, respectively. Discussion: ICAN may reduce anger and negative attributions after TBI and merits further investigation.
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
改变消极归因的干预:减少脑损伤后愤怒情绪的可行性研究
目的:探讨创伤性脑损伤(TBI)患者愤怒、攻击、负性归因和换位思考的早期治疗效果。设计:随机候补对照试验。参与者:24名创伤性脑损伤(损伤后3年)的成年人,他们具有高于平均水平的攻击性和负归因偏见或较差的观点。干预:干预改变消极归因(ICAN)。测量方法:埃普斯情景(意图归因、敌意、指责;愤怒和攻击反应);攻击问卷;PROMIS-Anger;人际反应指数换位思考;以及参与者整体变化印象(PGIC)对愤怒和换位思考的影响。结果:21名参与者完成了研究(ICAN = 8;候补名单控制[WLC] = 13)。治疗后,与未接受治疗的WLC参与者相比,ICAN参与者对Epps情景的愤怒反应较低(p = 0.03)。其他组间比较无统计学意义。分析比较干预前和干预后样本(n=21)的变化,发现在接受治疗后,对Epps情景的意图归因(p < 0.01)和责备归因(p = 0.05)以及愤怒(p = 0.01)和攻击反应(p < 0.01)减少。干预后的AQ和promise - anger得分也显著降低(p < 0.01)。在PGIC测试中,分别有83%和45%的人报告在换位思考和愤怒方面发生了明显变化。讨论:ICAN可以减少脑损伤后的愤怒和消极归因,值得进一步研究。
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 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Experiences of Interpersonal Emotion Regulation for People with Heightened Emotions: An Examination in People with Bipolar Disorder and Those with High Aggression Beyond Main Effects? Affect Level as a Moderator in the Relation Between Affect Dynamics and Depressive Symptoms Depressive Symptoms and Binge Eating in Children: Examining Symptom Specificity in a Population-based Sample of Male and Female Children Impact of Psychological Stress on Emotion Regulation Strategies during COVID-19 in Young Adults with Self-Reported Social Anxiety The Role of Emotion Dysregulation in Problematic Exercise in those with Eating Disorders
×
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