A catastrophizing assessment of worrisome thoughts
A catastrophizing assessment of worrisome thoughts
复制标题
对令人担忧的想法进行灾难性评估
DOI：
10.1007/bf01175138
复制
发表时间：
1992
影响因子：
2.8
通讯作者：
T. Borkovec
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
M. Vasey;T. Borkovec
Kendall 和 Ingram (1987) 提出的与自动提问风格相关的焦虑认知产物在长期忧虑的背景下进行了检查，使用了一种模仿去灾难化认知治疗技术的方法。由于长期忧虑者对两个忧虑话题产生了一系列可能的灾难性后果，因此他们比不忧虑者产生了更多的灾难性步骤。此外，忧虑者报告称，随着灾难化的进展，主观不适感显着增加，而不忧虑者的报告显示没有变化。除了少数例外，忧虑者的灾难性序列的内容与不忧虑者的内容没有什么不同。尽管如此，忧虑者认为这些事件在他们的序列中实际发生的可能性明显高于不忧虑者。这些结果与 Ingram 和 Kendall (1987) 的观点一致，即焦虑与“假设”形式的自动问题有关。有人认为，在灾难化过程中观察到的忧虑者和非忧虑者认知产物之间的差异反映了忧虑者更容易获得对灾难性“假设”答案的详细记忆存储。通过经常重复而获得的问题。
Cognitive products of anxiety related to the automatic questioning style proposed by Kendall and Ingram (1987) were examined in the context of chronic worry using a method modeled after the cognitive therapy technique of decatastrophizing. As chronic worriers generated sequences of possible catastrophic consequences for two worry topics, they generated significantly more catastrophic steps than nonworriers. Also, worriers reported a significant increase in subjective discomfort as catastrophizing progressed while nonworriers' reports revealed no change. With few exceptions, the content of worriers' catastrophic sequences did not differ from that of nonworriers. Despite this, worriers rated the events in their sequences as significantly more likely to actually occur than nonworriers. These results are consistent with the view of Ingram and Kendall (1987) that anxiety is associated with automatic questions of the form “what if?” It is argued that the differences between the cognitive products of worriers and nonworriers observed during catastrophizing reflect worriers' more ready access to elaborate memory stores of answers to catastrophic “what if?” questions that have been acquired through frequent repetition.