Cognitive confrontation and avoidance during a naturalistic medical stressor

This study was undertaken to shed some light on problems that have arisen in measuring cognitive confrontation (monitoring) and cognitive avoidance (blunting) with a self-report questionnaire, the Miller Behavioral Style Scale (MBSS; Miller, 1987). For this purpose, variants of both coping styles were studied in a naturalistic setting: 37 women who underwent prenatal diagnosis were interviewed at home about their ways of coping with different stages of the procedure, a few days before they expected the diagnostic results. Interview fragments pertaining to cognitive confrontation and avoidance were selected and analysed by two investigators in order to generate categories of avoidance and confrontation coping strategies. For some of the fragments, inter judge reliability was assessed using new judges. A comparison between the categories found and the kinds of items used in the MBSS shows that in real life more coping variants occur than those represented in the MBSS, in particular variants that involve a combination of cognitive confrontation and avoidance. Implications for the dimensionality of both concepts and for their measurement are discussed.     

An animal analogue to systematic desensitization and elimination of avoidance

Rats first acquired a two-way avoidance response to a discrete warning signal (80 db white noise.) The effects of 3 experimental and 3 control treatments on elimination of the response were evaluated on a nonshock posttreatment extinction test. Group Systematic Desensitization (SD) received graded exposure to the warning signal while they were eating. Rats in Graded Hierarchy (GH) and Extinction (Ext) groups were yoked to Ss in the SD group such that GH and Ext treatment was identical with that of SD except that neither group ate and the Ext group was exposed to the full intensity warning signal (nongraded exposure) on all trials. None of the control groups was exposed to the warning signal between acquisition and the posttreatment test. Results indicated that SD, while interfering with avoidance during treatment, did not differ in effectiveness from control treatment and was significantly less effective than GH and Ext, when avoidance was tested in extinction. It was suggested that the present analogue SD technique impaired S's reception of (exposure to) the warning signal during treatment.     

Anxious and depressive avoidance behavior in post-loss psychopathology: a longitudinal study

Background: Avoidance behavior is a central component of cognitive behavioral theories of bereavement-related psychopathology. Yet, its role is still not well understood. This study examined associations of anxious and depressive avoidance behaviors with concurrently and prospectively assessed symptom-levels of prolonged grief disorder (PGD), depression, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Design and Methods: Two hundred and ninety-one individuals, confronted with loss maximally three years earlier, completed self-report measures of anxious and depressive avoidance and emotional distress and again completed distress measures one year later. Results: Anxious and depressive avoidance were concurrently associated with symptom-levels of PGD, depression, and PTSD, even when controlling for the shared variance between both forms of avoidance and relevant socio-demographic and loss-related variables. Prospective analyses showed that baseline anxious avoidance predicted increased symptom-levels of PGD, depression, and PTSD one year later, among participants who were in their first year of bereavement but not among those who were beyond this first year. Baseline depressive avoidance was significantly associated with elevated PTSD one year later, irrespective of time since loss. Conclusions: Both anxious and depressive avoidance are associated with different indices of poor long-term adjustment following loss. However, anxious avoidance seems primarily detrimental in the first year of bereavement.     

Response-shock delay as a reinforcer in avoidance behavior

After rats received preliminary training to avoid shock on a discrete-trial retractable-bar avoidance procedure, the procedure was changed such that responses retracted the lever but did not affect the rate of shock. Responses only delayed the onset of shock. About half of the animals under these procedures responded consistently on almost 100% of the discrete-trial cycles over days. When short latencies maximized the response-shock delay, animals tended to make short-latency responses. When long latencies maximized the response-shock delay, animals tended to make long-latency responses. When all response latencies produced the same response-shock delay, animals made differing average-latency responses. And, when responses did not delay shock, most of the animals primarily engaged in shock-elicited responding while the other animals engaged in preshock responding.     

Schema theory: a critical appraisal and reevaluation

The authors critically review a number of the constructs and associated predictions proposed in schema theory (R. A. Schmidt, 1975). The authors propose that new control and learning theories should include a reformulated (a) notion of a generalized motor program that is not based on motor program but still accounts for the strong tendency for responses to maintain their relative characteristics; (b) mechanism or processes whereby an abstract movement structure based on proportional principles (e.g., relative timing, relative force) is developed through practice; and (c) explanation for parameter learning that accounts for the benefits of parameter variability but also considers how variability is scheduled. Furthermore, they also propose that new theories of motor learning must be able to account for the consistent findings spawned as a result of the schema theory proposal and must not be simply discounted because of some disfavor with the motor program notion, in general, or schema theory, more specifically.     

Cognitive coping with the threat of rape: vigilance and cognitive avoidance

Individual differences in women's avoidant and vigilant style in coping with the threat of rape were explored in four studies. In the first study, 97 women read a rape scenario and completed measures of cognitive vigilance and avoidance. They also provided ratings of fear of rape and anticipated coping problems in case of sexual assault. Vigilance was associated with significantly higher levels of fear of rape and anticipation of more severe coping problems. No effects were found for cognitive avoidance. Study 2 replicated these findings with a sample of 275 women. In addition, it showed that high vigilance was associated with significantly more rape-preventive behaviors. Study 3, including 172 women, was an online study on the effect of cognitive coping style on fear of rape, anticipated coping problems, and two behavioral measures of rape avoidance. High vigilance was related to higher levels of fear of rape, anticipation of more severe coping problems, and more rape-preventive behaviors. Finally, Study 4 (N=210) showed that individual differences in cognitive coping style affected rape-related affect and behavior in the absence of a rape scenario, underlining the chronic salience of the threat of rape for women. Vigilance was positively related to fear of rape, rape-avoidance behavior, and anticipated coping problems. In contrast, a negative relationship was found between cognitive avoidance and fear of rape, rape-avoidance strategies, and anticipated coping problems. Across the four studies, no evidence was found for an interactive effect of cognitive avoidance and vigilance, as suggested by the construct of repression versus sensitization. The findings are discussed in the light of previous research on repression-sensitization in coping with threatening information.     

Extinction of Sidman avoidance behavior

Extinction of Sidman avoidance behavior by eliminating the noxious stimulus was studied in Sprague-Dawley rats with bar-pressing as the response. Each of three subjects was trained and extinguished on each of the following schedules in a different order: nondiscriminated, response-shock interval = 20 sec, shock-shock interval = 5 sec; nondiscriminated, response-shock interval = 40 sec, shock-shock interval = 5 sec; discriminated, response-white noise interval = 15 sec, noise-shock interval = 5 sec, shock-shock interval = 5 sec. Less than one 4-hr session was required for extinction for all procedures. When a warning stimulus was present, resistance to extinction increased. Subjects did not, however, respond to avoid the signal. Only small differences in extinction were found after training on different schedules with no warning signal.     

Stimulus control of avoidance behavior

The introduction of a warning signal preceding shocks greatly increased the effectiveness of avoidance responding. Periods of “warm-up” at the beginning of the session were eliminated, and the number of shocks received by the subjects was greatly reduced. With response-shock interval constant, response rate increased as the interval between the response and the onset of the warning signal was shortened. The response tended to occur shortly after the onset of the warning signal regardless of the duration of these “safe” periods. A greatly elevated response rate was maintained even when the duration of the safe period was reduced to 0.3 sec. Thus, the pre-shock signal obtained nearly exclusive control of the responding and overrode the usual “temporal discrimination” of the response-shock interval.