4.3 Article

Investigation of the interactive effects of gender and psychological factors on pain response

Journal

BRITISH JOURNAL OF HEALTH PSYCHOLOGY
Volume 9, Issue -, Pages 405-418

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1348/1359107041557101

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives. There is growing evidence to suggest that certain psychological modulators of pain sensitivity are dependent on gender. The aim of the present study was to examine further whether cognitive-affective factors (with specific focus on situational anxiety) shown to modulate pain report and behaviour have differential effects on men's and women's response to experimentally induced pain. Method. A sample of 80 healthy university students (40 women, 40 men) was assessed on subjective measures of anxiety (situational and dispositional), anxiety-sensitivity and attitudes toward the experimental pain procedure prior to being exposed to a cold pressor test (constant temperature + 1 degreesC; +/- 1 degreesC, cut-off limit 240 s). Results. The present study produced three main findings: (1) No effect of gender was found on any of the pain measures; however, an interactive effect of anxiety and gender was found on measures of pain tolerance with low anxiety men displaying significantly higher pain tolerance than both low and high anxiety women. (2) Men classified as low-anxious tolerated cold pressor pain significantly longer than men classified as high-anxious, while no such effect of anxiety on pain response was observed in women. (3) Gender-specific associations were observed between other psychological variables (including anxiety-sensitivity and attitudes toward pain) and thermal pain response. Conclusion. Results from the present study suggest that there are important differences in the way cognitive-affective factors impact on the pain response of men and women. Further research is needed to explore potential psychosocial and physiological mechanisms that may underlie such differences.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available