Upload
sharyl-whitehead
View
222
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
What is thought suppression?According to Daniel Wegner
‘attempting to banish ones unwanted thoughts’In everyday terms
It is the attempted removal of unwanted thoughts from the mind.
A natural reaction Rachman and Da Silva (1978)
80% of people will attempt to suppress an unwanted thought
Why is thought suppression important?Smoking cessation (Toll, Sobell, Sobell & Wagner, 2000) Worrying (Mathews & Milroy, 1993) Stress (Roehrich & Goldman, 1995) Sleep impairment (Ree et al, 2004 ) ASD (Harvey & Bryant, 1998), OCD (Freeston & Ladouceur, 1997), GAD (Beckner et al 1988 ), PTSD (Foa, Steketee & Rothbaum, 1989; Ehlers & Steil,
1995), Specific Phobias (Thorpe & Salkovskis, 1997) Depression (Wegner, 1994)
Research outlineWhy is it that we cannot suppress our
thoughts?
What are the possible effects of thought suppression on behaviour?
What are the alternatives to thought suppression in the management of unwanted
thoughts?
Procedure1. Screening measures2. Equivalence training and testing3. Five minute suppression phase4. Induction of cognitive load5. Avoidance program
Opposition Relations and TSOpposition relations seem particularly interesting
in this context
When a person is trying to suppress a thought then one strategy may be to think of something that is very different or opposite along some dimension E.g., if I am trying not to think of something sad or
depressing then I may think of something happy or uplifting
However, doing so may eventually fail for the same reason that any other distracter fails – because the association between the stimuli is strengthened
Procedure1. Screening measures2. Same opposite training and testing3. Five minute suppression phase4. Induction of cognitive load5. Avoidance program
Stewart, Hooper and McHugh (under review)
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
B1: Target A1: Same[Trained]
C1: Same[Derived]
C2: Opposite[Derived]
Control
Word Category
Mea
n F
req
uen
cy o
f R
emo
val
But so what…..According to our results it is likely that thought
suppression is difficult due to environmental reminders
However, from an ACT perspective, we are not really concerned with whether we can suppress out thoughts per se
Instead we are interested in valued living
It is therefore more important to us to determine if thought suppression narrows our behavioral repertoire causing us to lose contact with our values
Procedure
Screening measures
Equivalence training and testing
Five minute suppression phase
Induction of cognitive load – (6-digit number)
Preference program
What can we do instead?!According to Relational Frame Theory (RFT)
control based strategies like suppression only serve to enhance the relational network associated with an unwanted thought.
In order to avoid the unwanted thoughts, one will also have to avoid all thoughts in the relational network as a transformation of suppression functions will occur. (Hooper, Saunders & McHugh, 2010)
Recent AlternativesAcceptance based strategies disrupt the
transformation of stimulus functions I.e. they alter the aversive functions of the stimuli in a
relational networkSpecifically, acceptance based strategies
encourage the client to experience the unwanted thoughts without attempts at altering their form or frequencyDefusion
Defusion encourages people to distance themselves from their thoughts
Mindfulness Mindfulness encourages present moment living, enabling
people to come into contact with unwanted thoughts in a non judgemental manner
Intervention based researchDefusion intervention study – learned
helplessnessStep one – screening questionnairesStep two – instruction; thought suppression,
defusion, no instructionStep three - learned helplessness has been
used in previous research to induce a depressed like state by exposing participants to an insolvable task.
Step four – the dependent measure; maze task
Intervention based researchDefusion intervention study – food cravings
Step one – Participants told they are to refrain from eating chocolate for 6 days
Step two – Instruction; thought suppression, defusion, no instruction
Step three –Participants had to record the amount of times they ate chocolate across a five day period, they also recorded the amount of cravings they experienced.
Step four – Participants returned to the lab to complete a taste test, where rebound was measured.
Hooper, Sandoz, Ashton, Clarke and McHugh (2012)
Defusion TS Control
Cravings 13.25 9.29 11.71
Chocolate eaten 5.88 7.29 9.64
Minstrels eaten 3.31 14.59 10.93
Intervention based researchMindfulness based study – Spider fear
Step 1 – screening questionnairesStep 2 – thought suppression/mindfulness
inductionsStep 3 – Behavioural Approach Test (BAT)Step 4 – anxiety measure
Behavioural Approach Test (BAT)1. Move 1 metre to the table2. Move 1 more metre to the table3. Approach the table4. Touch the jar for more than 10 seconds5. Lift up the jar6. Open the jar7. Touch the spider with a pencil for more than
10 seconds8. Remove the spider from the jar9. Touch it with a finger for more than 10
seconds10.Put the spider on their hand
Intervention based researchMindfulness based study – Stereotype threat
(female math stereotype)Step 1 – Maths test 1Step 2 – Mindfulness versus no mindfulness
exerciseStep 3 – Induction of stereotype threatStep 4 – Maths test 2
Future DirectionsLanguage and Behavioural Avoidance
Inclusion of appetitive stimulus – up the valenceManipulation of values
Intervention Based ResearchThe development of different behavioural
measures of the effectiveness of ACT component based techniques Public speaking Sports performance Studying behaviour Pain