首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Springer Open Choice >Frequency of Intrusions and Appraisal of Related Distress After Analogue Trauma: A Comparative Ecological Momentary Assessment Methods Study
【2h】

Frequency of Intrusions and Appraisal of Related Distress After Analogue Trauma: A Comparative Ecological Momentary Assessment Methods Study

机译:类比创伤后的侵入频率和相关痛苦的评估:一种比较生态矩的评估方法研究

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Intrusive thoughts, images, and their appraisal remain difficult to study despite their clinical relevance. Clinical studies typically used time-based (frequency and distress per observation period), while analogue studies mainly used event-based (report upon occurrence) assessment. A comparison of intrusion frequency, distress appraisal, compliance, and reactivity across different assessments is mostly lacking, particularly with regard to analogue research. Here, intrusions were induced via aversive films and assessed by a smart phone application for 4 days. Three sampling modes were compared by randomizing participants to one of three conditions: either one, or five time-based daily prompts, or event-based assessment. At the end of the study, all participants reported intrusions once again in a retrospective summary assessment. Results indicate that intrusions and their distress decayed over a few days. The three assessments did not differ in intrusion frequency, distress appraisal, compliance (generally high), reactivity (generally low), or retrospective summary assessment. Across groups, the more aversive and arousing participants rated the film clips and the more reactivity to the electronic-diary assessment they reported, the more intrusive memories they had; assessment modes did not differ on this. Thus, no general differences were found between electronic-diary assessment modes for analogue intrusions, giving researchers flexibility for tailoring ecological momentary assessment to specific study aims.
机译:尽管与临床相关,但侵入性思想,图像及其评估仍然难以研究。临床研究通常使用基于时间的评估(每个观察期的频率和痛苦),而模拟研究则主要使用基于事件的评估(发生时报告)。多数情况下,尤其是在模拟研究方面,缺乏对入侵频率,痛苦评估,依从性和反应性的比较。在这里,入侵是通过令人反感的影片诱发的,并通过智能手机应用程序评估了4天。通过将参与者随机分配到以下三种条件之一来比较三种采样模式:基于时间的一种或五种日常提示,或基于事件的评估。在研究结束时,所有参与者均在回顾性总结评估中再次报告了入侵。结果表明,入侵及其困扰在几天之内消失了。这三项评估在入侵频率,痛苦评估,依从性(通常较高),反应性(通常较低)或回顾性总结评估方面没有差异。在各组中,参与者对影片剪辑的反感和激起程度越高,他们报告的电子日记评估反应越多,他们拥有的侵入性记忆就越多;评估模式对此没有不同。因此,在模拟入侵的电子日记评估模式之间未发现一般差异,这为研究人员提供了针对特定研究目标定制生态瞬时评估的灵活性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号