|
| Behavior Analytic Approaches to Experimental Psychopathology Research: Experimental Models and Analogs of Human Suffering |
| Monday, May 31, 2004 |
| 9:00 AM–10:20 AM |
| Fairfax B |
| Area: EAB/CBM; Domain: Applied Research |
| Chair: John P. Forsyth (University at Albany, SUNY) |
| Abstract: . |
| |
| Interoceptive Fear Conditioning and the Etiology of Panic Disorder: Overview, Methodology, and Experimental Evaluation |
| JASON PRENOVEAU (University at Albany, SUNY), John P. Forsyth (University at Albany, SUNY) |
| Abstract: Responding focused inward on bodily signs and symptoms of arousal associated with such attacks, and the development of anxious apprehension about subsequent panic attacks. In the process, benign bodily cues that precede panic attacks often acquire aversive functions, and can subsequently evoke full blown panic attacks, thus further modifying the aversive functions of antecedent bodily cues. According to contemporary learning accounts, fearful responding to otherwise benign bodily cues develops via a process of Pavlovian interoceptive fear conditioning. To date, there has been no systematic experimental evaluations with humans designed to test key components of the interoceptive conditioning account. Here, we will provide an overview of the interoceptive conditioning account, and describe an experiment wherein we attempted to establish autonomic and self-reported fearful responding to a benign interoceptive conditional stimulus that was paired in a contingency with an aversive interoceptive unconditioned stimulus. The experimental methodology and results will be described broadly, with specific attention to how interoceptive fear conditioning may be integrated within behavior analytic accounts of the etiology and maintenance of anxiety-related problems. |
| |
| Risk Factors For Anxiety Disorders: Overview Of The Moderating Role Of Acceptance And Experiential Avoidance |
| JOHN P. FORSYTH (University at Albany, SUNY), Velma Barrios (University at Albany, SUNY), Dean Acheson (University at Albany, SUNY) |
| Abstract: Several psychological (e.g., perceived uncontrollability) and experiential (e.g., Pavlovian fearconditioning) risk factors have been described as contributing to the etiology and maintenance of anxiety-related disorders. Such risk factors are typically discussed in isolation from other possible moderating variables and processes. Here, we describe several noted risk factors for anxiety pathology as conceptualized within mainstream behavior therapy, and evaluate their functional role in the context of behavior analytic notions of acceptance and experiential avoidance. It will be argued that virtually all contemporary psychological and experiential risk factors for anxiety disorders fail to make sense as "risk factors" when set within a context of acceptance or approach behaviors that entail full contact with the automatic and derivedstimulus functions of events. Such events are often unwanted private events and the situations that occasion them. We conclude by casting such risk factors within a context of experiential avoidance and argue that experiential avoidance is the toxic diathesis for anxiety-related suffering and that known risk factors for anxiety problems are best viewed as collateral byproducts of avoidance-related processes. Experimental and applied implications of this account will be described and future directions for research of this type will be offered. |
| |
| Pavlovian Fear Conditioning and the Anxiety Disorders: A Normal Learning Process Gone Awry in the Context of Experiential Avoidance? |
| VELMA BARRIOS (University at Albany, SUNY), John P. Forsyth (University at Albany, SUNY), Dean Acheson (University at Albany, SUNY) |
| Abstract: Avoidance, or any consequential act whose function is to minimize or prevent the occurrence of unwanted emotional responses, has figured prominently in behavioral accounts of anxiety disorders. Recent behavior analytic accounts argue that experiential avoidance acts as a toxic predisposition (rather than a consequential coping mechanism only) for anxiety disorders. This view has been used to explain how adaptive emotional responses (e.g., fearful and anxious behaviors) and learning processes (e.g., Pavlovian fear conditioning) can become disordered in a clinical sense. This paper will describe a recent experiment wherein participants high and low in experiential avoidance underwent a Pavlovian fear conditioning procedure. Recognizing that Pavlovian fear conditioning is not pathogenic, we reasoned that persons high in experiential avoidance may be more likely to show greater magnitude autonomic response, coupled with greater reports of fear and distress following reinforced vs. nonreinforced stimuli relative to their less avoidant counterparts. Data will be described evaluating this proposition, including whether experiential avoidance accounts for the observed relations above and beyond other assessed anxiety-related risk factors (e.g., anxiety sensitivity, trait anxiety). Implications of these findings will be discussed broadly in the context of contemporary learning accounts of the origins of anxiety-related problems. |
| |
| Acceptance and Pain: A Systematic Analysis of the Role of Demand Characteristics in an Acceptance Based Approach to Pain Tolerance |
| BRYAN T. ROCHE (National University of Ireland, Maynooth), John P. Forsyth (University at Albany, SUNY), Lisa Van der werff (National University of Ireland, Maynooth) |
| Abstract: The current study sought to extend upon Hayes, Bissett, Korn, Zettle, Rosenfarb, Cooper and Grunt (1999), which compared the impact of control versus acceptance-based coping rationales on subjects' tolerance for pain. In the current study, the role of demand characteristics in an acceptance-based approach to pain tolerance was analyzed in the short and long terms. Baseline levels of pain tolerance were recorded for each subject, using a cold pressor task, before they were exposed to a brief acceptance rationale for pain tolerance, or a placebo social interaction. Subtle social pressure was also placed on half of the subjects in each condition to perform well at the cold pressor task. Cold-pressor performances were also recorded for each subject immediately following the intervention. Adherence measures were taken and subjective ratings of pain and state anxiety levels were recorded before and after interventions. Finally, a three-month follow-up cold-pressor task assessed subjects’ pain tolerance in the absence of a therapeutic intervention or placebo. The results suggest that the effectiveness of acceptance-based approaches need to be carefully considered in terms of the demand characteristics placed on clients during therapy. |
|
| |