4.2 Article

The simulation heuristic and visual imagery in pessimism for future negative events in anxiety

期刊

CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY & PSYCHOTHERAPY
卷 12, 期 4, 页码 313-325

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/cpp.455

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A salient feature of clinical anxiety and its disorders is an elevated subjective probability judgement that future negative events will happen to the individual. A neglected area of research is the cognitive mechanisms that might underlie this judgement in patient populations. First, we investigated the ease of being able to simulate imaginary negative events happening to the individual ('the simulation heuristic'). Second, we conducted the first investigation to our knowledge into the possible role of visual imagery characteristics on subjective probability for negative events. Twenty-six patients who had a clinical level of anxiety and 26 low-anxiety control participants simulated mentally and also formed visual images of future negative events. They then rated the likelihood of the events happening to them. As predicted, with anxious patients the simulation heuristic was correlated with subjective probability, and they reported increased access to their simulations compared to control participants. The visual image results were more complex: anxious patients' ease of image formation was correlated with subjective probability but did not differ from that of the control participants, and vividness and dismissibility were enhanced in anxious patients but did not correlate with subjective probability. Clinically, helping anxious patients to improve their access to simulations of why events will not happen may help lower their subjective probability. Future research could seek to confirm this experimentally in a clinical intervention study, as well as isolate further the different roles particular visual image characteristics may play in specific aspects of clinical anxiety. Copyright (c) 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据