Individuals with current suicidal ideation demonstrate implicit “fearlessness of death”

Hussey, Ian; Barnes‐Holmes, Dermot; Booth, Richard

doi:10.1016/j.jbtep.2015.11.003

Cited by 23 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 73 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The vast majority of tools to assess the likelihood of repeat engagement in suicidal behaviour rely on self-report. A burgeoning line of research investigates possibilities for detecting cognitive reactivity towards suicide-relevant content that is outside of individuals' conscious awareness, including implicit attitudes via the Death/Life Implicit Attitudes Test [ 56 , 57 , 99 ]. Other approaches, such as the death evaluation Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure [ 99 ], have also found specific cognitive biases towards self-referent versus abstract death-related stimuli in individuals with current suicidal ideation.…”

Section: Key Directions For Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

The integrated motivational–volitional model of suicidal behaviour

O’Connor

Kirtley

2018

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

847

802

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Suicide is a major public health concern accounting for 800 000 deaths globally each year. Although there have been many advances in understanding suicide risk in recent decades, our ability to predict suicide is no better now than it was 50 years ago. There are many potential explanations for this lack of progress, but the absence, until recently, of comprehensive theoretical models that predict the emergence of suicidal ideation distinct from the transition between suicidal ideation and suicide attempts/suicide is key to this lack of progress. The current article presents the integrated motivational–volitional (IMV) model of suicidal behaviour, one such theoretical model. We propose that defeat and entrapment drive the emergence of suicidal ideation and that a group of factors, entitled volitional moderators (VMs), govern the transition from suicidal ideation to suicidal behaviour. According to the IMV model, VMs include access to the means of suicide, exposure to suicidal behaviour, capability for suicide (fearlessness about death and increased physical pain tolerance), planning, impulsivity, mental imagery and past suicidal behaviour. In this article, we describe the theoretical origins of the IMV model, the key premises underpinning the model, empirical tests of the model and future research directions.This article is part of the theme issue ‘Evolutionary thanatology: impacts of the dead on the living in humans and other animals'.

show abstract

Section: Key Directions For Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

The integrated motivational–volitional model of suicidal behaviour

O’Connor

Kirtley

2018

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

847

802

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Here, we employ the latter sense of the words. For this reason, some researchers have referred to the blocks using arbitrary designations such as "A" and "B" (e.g., Hussey, Barnes-Holmes, & Booth, 2016) or as "pro" versus "anti" the domain of interest targeted by the IRAP (as in proand anti-spider; e.g., Nicholson & Barnes-Holmes, 2012) histories of the participants. In the case of the current example, participants who report strongly gender-stereotypical biases would, for example, be expected to produce a larger menmasculine response bias.…”

Section: A Brief Description Of the Irapmentioning

confidence: 99%

The PI IRAP : An alternative scoring algorithm for the IRAP using a probabilistic semiparametric effect size measure

Schryver

Hussey

Neve

et al. 2018

Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure (IRAP) has been used to assess the probability of arbitrarily applicable relational responding or as an indirect measure of implicit attitudes. To date, IRAP effects have commonly been quantified using the DIRAP scoring algorithm, which was derived from Greenwald, Nosek and Banaji's (2003) D effect size measure. In the article, we highlight the difference between an effect size measure and a scoring algorithm, discuss the drawbacks associated with D, and propose an alternative: a probabilistic, semiparametric measure referred to as the Probabilistic Index (Thas, De Neve, Clement, & Ottoy, 2012). Using a relatively large IRAP dataset, we demonstrate how the PI is more robust to the influence of outliers and skew (which are typical of reaction time data). Finally, we conclude that PI models, in addition to producing point estimate scores, can also provide confidence intervals, significance tests, and afford the possibility to include covariates, all of which may aid single subject design studies.

show abstract

“…Specifically, whereas the IAT presents all four stimulus categories on each trial and assesses the relative bias for one pattern of category pairings over the other (e.g., categorizing "self with life and others with death" vs. "self with death and others with life": Nock et al, 2010), the IRAP presents individual stimulus category pairings separately across trials and provides separate bias scores for each (e.g., responding to "self-life", "self-death", "others-life", and "others-death" as being true vs. false across blocks: Hussey, Barnes-Holmes, & Booth, 2016). Given that the two label categories and two target categories are never presented within the same trial, the trial-types can therefore be described as being procedurally independent (e.g., a "men-objects" trial on the IRAP contains no stimuli from the categories "women" or "humans").…”

Section: Irap Is Non-relative But Not A-contextualmentioning

confidence: 99%

The IRAP Is Nonrelative but not Acontextual: Changes to the Contrast Category Influence Men’s Dehumanization of Women

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure (IRAP) is frequently employed over other measures of so-called implicit attitudes because it produces four independent and "non-relative" bias scores, thereby providing greater clarity around what drives an effect. Indeed, studies have sometimes emphasized the procedural separation of the four trial-types by choosing to report only the results of a single, theoretically meaningful trial-type. However, no research to date has examined the degree to which performance on a given trial-type is impacted upon by other stimulus categories employed within the task. The current study examined the extent to which response biases toward "women" are influenced by two different contrast categories: "men" versus "inanimate objects". Results indicated that greater dehumanization of women was observed in the context of the latter relative to the former category. The findings highlight that the IRAP may be described as a non-relative, but not a-contextual, measure of brief and immediate relational responses.Keywords: Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure, Relational Frame Theory, dehumanization of women IRAP IS NON-RELATIVE BUT NOT A-CONTEXTUAL 3The IRAP is non-relative but not a-contextual: Changes to the contrast category influence men's dehumanization of women The Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure (IRAP) was created as a way to assess natural verbal relations "on the fly" (Barnes-Holmes, Barnes-Holmes, Stewart, & Boles, 2010).More specifically, the IRAP was designed to capture arbitrarily applicable relational responding, which is posited by Relational Frame Theory (RFT) to account for complex human behavior such as language and higher cognition (see Hayes, Barnes-Holmes, & Roche, 2001; Hughes & Barnes-Holmes, 2016 for detailed treatments). The IRAP has now been employed in a wide range of contexts, including the assessment of such relational responding in domains of both clinical (see Vahey, Nicholson, & Barnes-Holmes, 2015 for meta-analysis) and social relevance (e.g., Drake et al., 2015;Rönspies et al., 2015), as well as within basic science contexts (e.g., Bortoloti & de Rose, 2012;Hughes, 2012;).Due to some procedural similarities with other measures such as the Implicit Association Test (IAT: Greenwald, McGhee, & Schwartz, 1998), the IRAP is frequently referred to or employed as a measure of so-called "implicit attitudes" (e.g., Hussey & Barnes-Holmes, 2012), a term that was borrowed from cognitive psychology and refers to "automatic" behaviors that are emitted outside of awareness or intentionality, under low volitional control and/or with high cognitive efficiency (see De Houwer & Moors, 2010). However, more recent work has emphasized that such references to the IRAP as a measure of implicit attitudes were heuristic in nature, and has attempted to clarify the relationship between the cognitive and functionalanalytic approaches to such behavioral phenomena (Hughes, Barnes-Holmes, & De Houwer, 2011;Hughes, Barnes-Holmes, & Vahey, 2012; see Barnes-Holmes & Hu...

show abstract

Individuals with current suicidal ideation demonstrate implicit “fearlessness of death”

Cited by 23 publications

References 73 publications

The integrated motivational–volitional model of suicidal behaviour

The integrated motivational–volitional model of suicidal behaviour

The PI IRAP : An alternative scoring algorithm for the IRAP using a probabilistic semiparametric effect size measure

The IRAP Is Nonrelative but not Acontextual: Changes to the Contrast Category Influence Men’s Dehumanization of Women

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About