Peter Muris , Peter J de Jong , Harald Merckelbach , Florence van Zuuren
{"title":"暴露治疗的结果是否受到监控应对方式的影响","authors":"Peter Muris , Peter J de Jong , Harald Merckelbach , Florence van Zuuren","doi":"10.1016/0146-6402(93)90014-S","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In the present study, 36 spider phobics received a one-session exposure in vivo treatment. It was investigated whether a monitoring (information seeking) coping style affected treatment outcome. In general, therapy appeared to be very successful. Yet, monitoring was found to be related to larger relapse at one week follow-up. This finding is in conflict with an earlier study of <span>Steketee, Bransfield, Miller, and Foa (1989)</span> that showed a favorable treatment outcome for monitors (information seekers) as compared to blunters (information avoiders). Potential explanations for the seemingly conflicting results are discussed.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100041,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Behaviour Research and Therapy","volume":"15 4","pages":"Pages 291-300"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1993-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/0146-6402(93)90014-S","citationCount":"22","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Is exposure therapy outcome affected by a monitoring coping style?\",\"authors\":\"Peter Muris , Peter J de Jong , Harald Merckelbach , Florence van Zuuren\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/0146-6402(93)90014-S\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>In the present study, 36 spider phobics received a one-session exposure in vivo treatment. It was investigated whether a monitoring (information seeking) coping style affected treatment outcome. In general, therapy appeared to be very successful. Yet, monitoring was found to be related to larger relapse at one week follow-up. This finding is in conflict with an earlier study of <span>Steketee, Bransfield, Miller, and Foa (1989)</span> that showed a favorable treatment outcome for monitors (information seekers) as compared to blunters (information avoiders). Potential explanations for the seemingly conflicting results are discussed.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100041,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in Behaviour Research and Therapy\",\"volume\":\"15 4\",\"pages\":\"Pages 291-300\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1993-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/0146-6402(93)90014-S\",\"citationCount\":\"22\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in Behaviour Research and Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/014664029390014S\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Behaviour Research and Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/014664029390014S","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Is exposure therapy outcome affected by a monitoring coping style?
In the present study, 36 spider phobics received a one-session exposure in vivo treatment. It was investigated whether a monitoring (information seeking) coping style affected treatment outcome. In general, therapy appeared to be very successful. Yet, monitoring was found to be related to larger relapse at one week follow-up. This finding is in conflict with an earlier study of Steketee, Bransfield, Miller, and Foa (1989) that showed a favorable treatment outcome for monitors (information seekers) as compared to blunters (information avoiders). Potential explanations for the seemingly conflicting results are discussed.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
