创伤后应激障碍患者的有价值双重任务。

IF 2.7 2区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY Psychological trauma : theory, research, practice and policy Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2023-03-30 DOI:10.1037/tra0001470
Tom IJdema, Odilia M Laceulle, Kathleen Thomaes, Kees Korrelboom
{"title":"创伤后应激障碍患者的有价值双重任务。","authors":"Tom IJdema, Odilia M Laceulle, Kathleen Thomaes, Kees Korrelboom","doi":"10.1037/tra0001470","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Dual-tasking studies show that emotionality and vividness of aversive memory decrease by engaging in a working memory task and simultaneous recall of that memory. Adding positive valence to a dual task might be a promising innovation in the amelioration of lab-induced memory. However, studies aiming to translate these findings into autobiographical memory of a posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) population find conflicting results or show methodological flaws. The current study assesses the benefit of adding positive valence to a dual-tasking procedure in PTSD patients.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>In a cross-over design PTSD patients (<i>N</i> = 33) recalled their traumatic memory and received the following three conditions in randomized order: rating positive pictures + exposure, rating neutral pictures + exposure, and exposure only. Each of the three conditions consisted of four sets of 1 min. In the first cycle, participants were exposed to each condition in a randomized order, which was then repeated in a second cycle. Before and after each condition, emotionality and vividness were rated on a visual analog scale (VAS), resulting in seven measurement timepoints in total.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Firstly, repeated measures ANOVAs showed a time effect: memories were less emotional and vivid after our summed (three) interventions. Secondly, repeated measures ANCOVAs indicated no evidence for differences between the conditions.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We did not find evidence for a benefit of adding positive valence to a dual-task procedure in PTSD patients. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":20982,"journal":{"name":"Psychological trauma : theory, research, practice and policy","volume":" ","pages":"892-902"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Valenced dual tasking in patients with posttraumatic stress disorder.\",\"authors\":\"Tom IJdema, Odilia M Laceulle, Kathleen Thomaes, Kees Korrelboom\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/tra0001470\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Dual-tasking studies show that emotionality and vividness of aversive memory decrease by engaging in a working memory task and simultaneous recall of that memory. Adding positive valence to a dual task might be a promising innovation in the amelioration of lab-induced memory. However, studies aiming to translate these findings into autobiographical memory of a posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) population find conflicting results or show methodological flaws. The current study assesses the benefit of adding positive valence to a dual-tasking procedure in PTSD patients.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>In a cross-over design PTSD patients (<i>N</i> = 33) recalled their traumatic memory and received the following three conditions in randomized order: rating positive pictures + exposure, rating neutral pictures + exposure, and exposure only. Each of the three conditions consisted of four sets of 1 min. In the first cycle, participants were exposed to each condition in a randomized order, which was then repeated in a second cycle. Before and after each condition, emotionality and vividness were rated on a visual analog scale (VAS), resulting in seven measurement timepoints in total.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Firstly, repeated measures ANOVAs showed a time effect: memories were less emotional and vivid after our summed (three) interventions. Secondly, repeated measures ANCOVAs indicated no evidence for differences between the conditions.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We did not find evidence for a benefit of adding positive valence to a dual-task procedure in PTSD patients. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20982,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychological trauma : theory, research, practice and policy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"892-902\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychological trauma : theory, research, practice and policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/tra0001470\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/3/30 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological trauma : theory, research, practice and policy","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/tra0001470","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/3/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究目的双重任务研究表明,通过参与工作记忆任务和同时回忆该记忆,会降低厌恶记忆的情绪性和生动性。在双重任务中加入积极情绪可能是改善实验室诱发记忆的一种有前途的创新。然而,旨在将这些发现转化为创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)人群自传体记忆的研究却发现了相互矛盾的结果或方法上的缺陷。本研究评估了在创伤后应激障碍患者的双重任务程序中加入积极情绪的益处:在交叉设计中,创伤后应激障碍患者(N = 33)回忆起他们的创伤记忆,并按随机顺序接受以下三种条件:评定积极图片+暴露、评定中性图片+暴露和仅暴露。这三个条件中的每个条件都包含四组,每组 1 分钟。在第一个循环中,受试者按随机顺序接触每个条件,然后在第二个循环中重复接触。在每个条件之前和之后,用视觉模拟量表(VAS)对情绪和生动性进行评分,总共有七个测量时间点:结果:首先,重复测量方差分析显示出时间效应:在我们的总和(三次)干预后,记忆的情感性和生动性都有所降低。其次,重复测量方差分析显示,没有证据表明不同条件之间存在差异:结论:我们没有发现在创伤后应激障碍患者的双任务程序中添加积极情绪有益的证据。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA,保留所有权利)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Valenced dual tasking in patients with posttraumatic stress disorder.

Objective: Dual-tasking studies show that emotionality and vividness of aversive memory decrease by engaging in a working memory task and simultaneous recall of that memory. Adding positive valence to a dual task might be a promising innovation in the amelioration of lab-induced memory. However, studies aiming to translate these findings into autobiographical memory of a posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) population find conflicting results or show methodological flaws. The current study assesses the benefit of adding positive valence to a dual-tasking procedure in PTSD patients.

Method: In a cross-over design PTSD patients (N = 33) recalled their traumatic memory and received the following three conditions in randomized order: rating positive pictures + exposure, rating neutral pictures + exposure, and exposure only. Each of the three conditions consisted of four sets of 1 min. In the first cycle, participants were exposed to each condition in a randomized order, which was then repeated in a second cycle. Before and after each condition, emotionality and vividness were rated on a visual analog scale (VAS), resulting in seven measurement timepoints in total.

Results: Firstly, repeated measures ANOVAs showed a time effect: memories were less emotional and vivid after our summed (three) interventions. Secondly, repeated measures ANCOVAs indicated no evidence for differences between the conditions.

Conclusions: We did not find evidence for a benefit of adding positive valence to a dual-task procedure in PTSD patients. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

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
CiteScore
11.20
自引率
3.20%
发文量
427
期刊介绍: Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy publishes empirical research on the psychological effects of trauma. The journal is intended to be a forum for an interdisciplinary discussion on trauma, blending science, theory, practice, and policy. The journal publishes empirical research on a wide range of trauma-related topics, including: -Psychological treatments and effects -Promotion of education about effects of and treatment for trauma -Assessment and diagnosis of trauma -Pathophysiology of trauma reactions -Health services (delivery of services to trauma populations) -Epidemiological studies and risk factor studies -Neuroimaging studies -Trauma and cultural competence
期刊最新文献
Exploring the role of technology in youth and adolescent deaths by suicide using data from the 2017-2019 National Violent Death Reporting System (NVDRS). Military sexual trauma, childhood trauma, and combat trauma: Associations with longitudinal posttraumatic growth among U.S. Veterans. Prospective study of individual characteristics and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms following childbirth: Birth satisfaction as a moderator. Assessing similarities and differences in thematic content across online mental health communities dedicated to trauma-related mental health conditions. Consuming hurricane-related media: The protective role of perceived trust.
×
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