Cognitive-behavioral treatments assume that the mechanisms of change depend on the assessment and questioning of biased beliefs. In contrast, recent developments have emphasized mindful acceptance interventions, in which clients allow thoughts to come and go without questioning them. In order to discuss therapeutic efficacy difference in emotional disorders, we explored the possible normalizing effects of cognitive questioning and mindful acceptance on sympathetic reactivity aroused by recall tasks. We compared the effects of different sequencing of cognitive questioning and mindful acceptance on emotional distress in two groups in which questioning either preceded (group 1) or followed (group 2) acceptance. Thirty-five non-clinical individuals (21 males, 14 females) randomly allocated to either group 1 or 2 participated in the experimental tasks (unpleasant recall, cognitive questioning, and metacognitive acceptance). Sympathetic reactivity levels were measured using galvanic skin response. Results showed that acceptance reduced sympathetic reactivity when compared to questioning. The best sequence was that in which questioning preceded acceptance. By interpreting sympathetic reactivity as a measure of emotional distress and experimental tasks as models for therapeutic approaches, this experiment suggests that acceptance is better than questioning in reducing emotional distress especially when cognitive questioning is followed by mindful acceptance.

Borlimi, R., Benetka, G., Brighetti, G., Caselli, G., Caletti, E., Redaelli, C., et al. (2019). An Investigation of Sequencing Effects in Combining Cognitive Questioning and Mindful Acceptance. JOURNAL OF RATIONAL-EMOTIVE AND COGNITIVE-BEHAVIOR THERAPY, 37(3), 284-298 [10.1007/s10942-018-0312-8].

An Investigation of Sequencing Effects in Combining Cognitive Questioning and Mindful Acceptance

Sarracino D.;
2019

Abstract

Cognitive-behavioral treatments assume that the mechanisms of change depend on the assessment and questioning of biased beliefs. In contrast, recent developments have emphasized mindful acceptance interventions, in which clients allow thoughts to come and go without questioning them. In order to discuss therapeutic efficacy difference in emotional disorders, we explored the possible normalizing effects of cognitive questioning and mindful acceptance on sympathetic reactivity aroused by recall tasks. We compared the effects of different sequencing of cognitive questioning and mindful acceptance on emotional distress in two groups in which questioning either preceded (group 1) or followed (group 2) acceptance. Thirty-five non-clinical individuals (21 males, 14 females) randomly allocated to either group 1 or 2 participated in the experimental tasks (unpleasant recall, cognitive questioning, and metacognitive acceptance). Sympathetic reactivity levels were measured using galvanic skin response. Results showed that acceptance reduced sympathetic reactivity when compared to questioning. The best sequence was that in which questioning preceded acceptance. By interpreting sympathetic reactivity as a measure of emotional distress and experimental tasks as models for therapeutic approaches, this experiment suggests that acceptance is better than questioning in reducing emotional distress especially when cognitive questioning is followed by mindful acceptance.
Articolo in rivista - Articolo scientifico
Acceptance; Cognitive therapy; Metacognition; Questioning; Sympathetic reactivity;
English
6-dic-2018
2019
37
3
284
298
none
Borlimi, R., Benetka, G., Brighetti, G., Caselli, G., Caletti, E., Redaelli, C., et al. (2019). An Investigation of Sequencing Effects in Combining Cognitive Questioning and Mindful Acceptance. JOURNAL OF RATIONAL-EMOTIVE AND COGNITIVE-BEHAVIOR THERAPY, 37(3), 284-298 [10.1007/s10942-018-0312-8].
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/10281/268846
Citazioni
  • Scopus 2
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 1
Social impact