Behaviorally treated irritable bowel syndrome patients: a four-year follow-up

Nineteen of 27 patients suffering from Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS) who had completed a multicomponent treatment involving progressive muscle relaxation, thermal biofeedback, cognitive therapy and IBS education were located and evaluated 4 yr posttreatment. Seventeen of 19 (89.5, or 63% of the total original sample) rated themselves as more than 50% improved. Six of the 12 patients (50%) who submitted symptom monitoring diaries met our criteria for clinical improvement, i.e. achieving at least a 50% reduction in primary IBS symptom scores. The means on all measures at long-term follow-up were lower than those obtained prior to treatment. When follow-up symptom means were compared with pretreatment means, significant (P less than 0.05) reductions were obtained on abdominal pain/tenderness, diarrhea, nausea, and flatulence.     

Four process studies in the behavioral treatment of chronic headache

Four studies of ‘process’ variables in the behavioral treatment of chronic headache are examined. No relation between headache activity-level reduction and therapist variables such as level of experience (study 1) or warmth, competence or helpfulness as perceived by the patient (Study 2) was found from treatments using relaxation training and/or biofeedback. A significant relation was found, however, between regularity of relaxation practice at home (Study 4) and headache-activity reduction and between regularity of showing some degree of hand warming in thermal biofeedback treatment for vascular headache and headache activity-level reduction (Study 3). Finally, no relation was found between changes in EMG and headache activity-level for tension-headache sufferers treated with frontal EMG biofeedback.     

The acquisition of parafoveal word information in reading

A somewhat counterintuitive finding has emerged from experiments that restrict the "window" of visual information available on a fixation during reading: fixation duration increases even though there is less information to process on a fixation. The two most likely explanations for this phenomenon are: (1) that the reader extracts abnormal information outside the window and this slows down processing; (2) that a restricted window does not allow a preview of a word before it is fixated, and hence identification of the word is slower when the word subsequently is fixated. In the present experiments, these two alternatives were tested. Conditions in which the size of the window alternated between fixations were compared with conditions in which the size of the window remained constant from fixation to fixation. This manipulation allowed us to separate effects due to restriction of the size of the window on the current fixation from preview benefits (which would be due to restriction of the size of the window on the prior fixation). Two experiments demonstrated clear beneficial effects on fixation duration due to receiving a preview of a word on the fixation prior to when it was fixated. In contrast, restriction of the size of the window had only marginal effects on the fixation on which that restriction occurred. In addition, a subsidiary analysis suggested that the benefit of previewing a word was influenced by its length; for short words, a preview primarily allowed the reader to skip the word more frequently, whereas for longer words, a preview primarily shortened the fixation time on the word when it was later fixated.