Relevant and irrelevant fear in flooding—A crossover study of phobic patients

Watson, J. P.; Marks, Isaac

doi:10.1016/s0005-7894(71)80062-x

Cited by 307 publications

(115 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

103

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…--= Statistical tests not reported in the study; Intervention X Time = Tests of mean differences showing a significant Intervention X Time interaction effect; Intervention > Control = Tests of clinically significant change showing a significant difference between intervention and control in proportions of participants experiencing change; As in the original study, results summarized only reflect statistical analyses reported in the study denoting differences between individual cognitive-behavioral treatment and control conditions; Intervention Outcomes for Barrett et al (1996) (Beck, Brown, Epstein, & Steer, 1988); STAI-Trait = State-Trait Anxiety Inventory; Leeds-Anxiety/ Depression = Leeds Scales for the Self-Assessment of Anxiety and Depression (Snaith, Bridge, & Hamilton, 1976); 0-8 Self-Anxiety/Depression = 9-point rating scale of anxiety and depression rated by patient (Snaith et al, 1976); BDI = Beck Depression Inventory; DAS = Dysfunctional Attitude Scale (Rush, Weissenburger, & Eaves, 1986); CCL = Cognition Checklist (Beck, Brown, Eidelson, Steer, & Riskind, 1987); SPQ = Subjective Probabilities Questionnaire (Butler, Gelder, Hibbert, Cullington, & Klimes, 1987); Interpretation = measure of interpretations of ambiguous material in a threatening way (Butler et al, 1987); FNE = Fear of Negative Evaluation Scale (Watson & Friend, 1969); 0-8 AssessorAnxiety/Depression = 9-point rating scale of anxiety and depression rated by assessors (Watson & Marks, 1971); Hamilton = Hamilton Anxiety Scale;…”

Section: Concluding Commentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conceptualizing changes in behavior in intervention research: The range of possible changes model.

Reyes

Kazdin

2006

Psychological Review

125

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An international movement has focused on identifying evidence-based interventions: Interventions that were developed to change psychological constructs, and have evidence from controlled studies on their behalf. However, inconsistent findings within individual intervention studies and among multiple studies of the same intervention raise critical problems for interpreting the evidence, and deciding when and whether an intervention is evidence-based. A theoretical and methodological framework (Range of Possible Changes [RPC] Model) is proposed to guide the study of change in intervention research. We recommend that future quantitative reviews of the research literature use the RPC Model to conceptualize, examine, and classify the available evidence for interventions. Further, future research should adopt the RPC Model to both develop theory-driven hypotheses and conduct examinations of the instances in which interventions may or may not change psychological constructs. Keywordsefficacy; effectiveness; range of possible changes; intervention; treatment The terms efficacy or effectiveness denote the study of whether interventions can successfully change specific psychological constructs or behaviors (e.g., Hoagwood, Hibbs, Brent, & Jensen, 1995;Kazdin, 2000;Lambert & Ogles, 2004). 1 An overriding goal of intervention research is to identify evidence-based interventions: Evidence from controlled experiments suggests these interventions change constructs they were developed to change. Researchers have developed classification systems through which a given intervention can be identified as evidence-based, based on prior well-controlled experimental outcome studies examining the intervention (e.g., Lonigan, Elbert, & Johnson, 1998;Nathan & Gorman, 2002;Roth & Fonagy, 2005). Upon scrutiny, the supportive evidence raises Correspondence regarding this manuscript should be addressed to Alan E. Kazdin, Child Study Center, Yale University School of Medicine, 230 S. Frontage Road, New Haven, CT 06520-7900. 1 The intervention literature often distinguishes between the terms efficacy and effectiveness by the setting in which changes in constructs occur. Specifically, efficacy research examines whether an intervention can change psychological constructs under controlled experimental conditions. In contrast, effectiveness research examines whether an intervention can change psychological constructs in more naturalistic settings outside the research laboratory. Despite these differences in settings, both of these research literatures examine the ability of interventions to change multidimensional constructs. Thus, the conceptual and methodological framework we propose generally applies to the study of change in multidimensional constructs in intervention research. At the same time, the evidence we cite in support of our proposed framework is largely gleaned from the efficacy literature, particularly because of its longer history of examination and replication, relative to the effectiveness literature. Thus, it is possible...

show abstract

Section: Concluding Commentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conceptualizing changes in behavior in intervention research: The range of possible changes model.

Reyes

Kazdin

2006

Psychological Review

125

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Watson and Marks Scale (WMS) (Watson & Marks, 1971). On this slightly modified version of the original WMS, patients rated their level of anxiety and agoraphobic avoidance in five standard situations (Emmdkamp, 1979).…”

Section: Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pulmonary function in panic disorder: evidence against the dyspnea-fear theory

Spinhoven

Onstein

Sterk

1995

Behaviour Research and Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary--The present study addresses the hypothesis consistent with the dyspnea-fear theory of panic, that in a subgroup of panic patients a non-pathological pulmonary obstructive component may induce dyspnea, dyspneic fear and, ultimately, panic. In 38 patients who met DSM-III-R criteria for panic disorder, pulmonary function was assessed and various measurements for panic symptoms and concomitant psychopathology were collected. In comparison to patients with a high Forced Expiratory Flow at 50% (FEF 50%), low FEF 50% patients demonstrated significantly lower levels of Forced Expiratory Volume (first second) and Peak Expiratory Flow and significantly lower FEVJFVC ratios. None of the differences on psychological measurements for symptom severity between low and high FEF 50% patients proved to be significant. Moreover, FEF 50% scores and FEV#FVC ratios were not correlated to any of the measures for panic or associated psychopathology. It is concluded that the existence of a distinct subgroup of panic patients with signs of actual airway obstruction leading to uncontrollable dyspnea and fear of suffocation remains questionable.

show abstract

“…Client and independent observer rated 5-phobic situations on 9-point scales for phobic anxiety and phobic avoidance respectively (Watson and Marks, 1971). The scores for the main phobia (street) were calculated separately; the scores for the other four phobias were added up.…”

Section: Assessmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The independent observer rated the client on 9-point scales for anxious mood and panic (Watson and Marks, 1971).…”

Section: Assessmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of historically portrayed modeling and group treatment on self-observation: A comparison with agoraphobics

Emmelkamp

Emmelkamp-Benner

1975

Behaviour Research and Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary-The effects of historically portrayed modeling and group treatment on self-observation were determined in a factorial design with agoraphobic patients. Group I saw a videotilm and was treated individually; group 2 saw the film and received group treatment; group 3 did not see the film and received individual treatment; and group 4 did not see the film and received group treatment. In the video recording improved %x-clients related their experiences with the same treatment.Assessments were made at the beginning and at the end of treatment and at the follow-up

show abstract

Relevant and irrelevant fear in flooding—A crossover study of phobic patients

Cited by 307 publications

References 21 publications

Conceptualizing changes in behavior in intervention research: The range of possible changes model.

Conceptualizing changes in behavior in intervention research: The range of possible changes model.

Pulmonary function in panic disorder: evidence against the dyspnea-fear theory

Effects of historically portrayed modeling and group treatment on self-observation: A comparison with agoraphobics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About