Top

Gepubliceerd in:

29-10-2018 | ORIGINAL PAPER

Generalized Pliance in Relation to Contingency Insensitivity and Mindfulness

Auteurs: Martin O’Connor, Philip Byrne, Francisco J. Ruiz, Louise McHugh

Gepubliceerd in: Mindfulness | Uitgave 5/2019

Abstract

Conceptual accounts of pliance, a particular class of rule-governed behavior, propose that its generalization precipitates insensitivity to direct contingencies. Accordingly, a context of mindfulness has been theorized to influence the way in which rules function and facilitate effective contact with such contingencies. Despite the profound implications of these conceptualizations, there is a dearth of empirical support for their claims. This study aimed to investigate self-reported generalized pliance as a predictor of sensitivity to changing schedules of reinforcement and mindfulness. Forty young adults completed the Generalized Pliance Questionnaire (GPQ), Contingency-shifting variant Iowa Gambling Task (csIGT), Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST), and Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory—Short Form. Analyses revealed that higher scores on the GPQ were predictive of lower mindfulness and sensitivity to changing contingencies on the csIGT and WCST with medium to large statistically significant effect sizes. The findings support the aforementioned conceptual accounts and have implications for novel research in mindfulness.

vorige artikel Modes of Processing Trauma: Self-Compassion Buffers Affective Guilt

volgende artikel Exploring Relationships Between CARE Program Fidelity, Quality, Participant Responsiveness, and Uptake of Mindful Practices

Axelrod, B. N., Goldman, R. S., & Woodard, J. L. (1992). Interrater reliability in scoring the Wisconsin card sorting test. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 6(2), 143–155. https://doi.org/10.1080/13854049208401851.CrossRefPubMed

Barnes-Holmes, D., O’Hora, D., Roche, B., Hayes, S. C., Bissett, R. T., & Lyddy, F. (2001). Understanding and verbal regulation. In S. C. Hayes, D. Barnes-Holmes, & B. Roche (Eds.), Relational frame theory: a post-Skinnerian account of human language and cognition (pp. 103–118). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.

Baruch, D. E., Kanter, J. W., Busch, A. M., Richardson, J. V., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2007). The differential effect of instructions on dysphoric and nondysphoric persons. The Psychological Record, 57(4), 543–554. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03395594.CrossRef

Berg, E. A. (1948). A simple objective technique for measuring flexibility in thinking. Journal of General Psychology, 39, 15–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221309.1948.9918159.CrossRefPubMed

Cella, M., Dymond, S., & Cooper, A. (2010). Impaired flexible decision-making in major depressive disorder. Journal of Affective Disorders, 124(1–2), 207–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2009.11.013.CrossRefPubMed

Ciarrochi, J., Zettle, R. D., Brockman, R., Duguid, J., Parker, P., Sahdra, B., & Kashdan, T. B. (2016). Measures that make a difference: a functional contextualistic approach to optimizing psychological measurement in clinical research and practice. In R. D. Zettle, S. C. Hayes, D. Barnes-Holmes, & A. Biglan (Eds.), The Wiley handbook of contextual behavioral science (pp. 320–346). West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Donadeli, J. M., & Strapasson, B. A. (2015). Effects of monitoring and social reprimands on instruction-following in undergraduate students. The Psychological Record, 65(1), 177–188. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-014-0099-7.CrossRef

Dymond, S., Cella, M., Cooper, A., & Turnbull, O. (2010). The contingency-shifting variant Iowa gambling task: an investigation with young adults. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 32(3), 239–248. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803390902971115.CrossRefPubMed

Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A. G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 1149–1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149.CrossRef

Gardner, F. L., & Moore, Z. E. (2007). The psychology of enhancing human performance: the mindfulness-acceptance-commitment approach. New York: Springer Publishing Company.CrossRef

Grant, D. A., & Berg, E. A. (1948). A behavioral analysis of degree of reinforcement and ease of shifting to new responses in a Weigl-type card-sorting problem. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 38(4), 404–411. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0059831.CrossRefPubMed

Greve, K. (1993). Can perseverative responses on the Wisconsin card sorting test be scored accurately? Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 8(6), 511–517. https://doi.org/10.1016/0887-6177(93)90051-2.CrossRefPubMed

Hambleton, R. K. (2001). The next generation of the ITC test translation and adaptation guidelines. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 17(3), 164–172. https://doi.org/10.1027//1015-5759.17.3.164.CrossRef

Harrington, D. (2009). Confirmatory factor analysis. New York: Oxford University Press.

Hayes, S. C., Brownstein, A. J., Haas, J. R., & Greenway, D. E. (1986). Instructions, multiple schedules, and extinction: distinguishing rule-governed from schedule-controlled behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 46(2), 137–147.CrossRef

Hayes, S. C., Kohlenberg, B. S., & Melancon, S. M. (1989a). Avoiding and altering rule-control as a strategy of clinical intervention. In S. C. Hayes (Ed.), Rule-governed behavior: cognition, contingencies and instructional control (pp. 359–386). New York: Plenum Press.CrossRef

Hayes, S. C., Zettle, R. D., & Rosenfarb, I. (1989b). Rule-following. In S. C. Hayes (Ed.), Rule-governed behavior: cognition, contingencies and instructional control (pp. 191–220). New York: Plenum Press.CrossRef

Hayes, S. C., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Roche, B. (Eds.). (2001). Relational frame theory: a post-Skinnerian account of human language and cognition. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.

Hayes, S. C., Villatte, M., Levin, M., & Hildebrandt, M. (2011). Open, aware, and active: contextual approaches as an emerging trend in the behavioral and cognitive therapies. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 7, 141–168. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032210-104449.CrossRefPubMed

Hayes, S., Pistorello, J., & Levin, M. (2012a). Acceptance and commitment therapy as a unified model of behavior change. The Counseling Psychologist, 40(7), 976–1002. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000012460836.CrossRef

Hayes, S. C., Strosahl, K. D., & Wilson, K. G. (2012b). Acceptance and commitment therapy: the process and practice of mindful change (2nd ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.

Hofmann, S., & Asmundson, G. (2008). Acceptance and mindfulness-based therapy: new wave or old hat? Clinical Psychology Review, 28(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2007.09.003.CrossRefPubMed

Hsieh, P. C., Yeh, T. L., Lee, I. H., Huang, H. C., Chen, P. S., Yang, Y. K., et al. (2010). Correlation between errors on the Wisconsin card sorting test and the availability of striatal dopamine transporters in healthy volunteers. Journal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience, 35(2), 90–94. https://doi.org/10.1503/jpn.090007.CrossRefPubMed

Ju, W., & Hayes, S. (2008). Verbal establishing stimuli: testing the motivative effect of stimuli in a derived relation with consequences. The Psychological Record, 58(3), 339–363. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03395623.CrossRef

Kabat-Zinn, J. (2005). Coming to our senses. New York: Hyperion.

Kissi, A., Hughes, S., Mertens, G., Barnes-Holmes, D., Houwer, J., & Crombez, G. (2017). A systematic review of pliance, tracking, and augmenting. Behavior Modification, 41(5), 683–707. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145445517693811.CrossRefPubMed

Kohls, N., Sauer, S., & Walach, H. (2009). Facets of mindfulness – results of an online study investigating the Freiburg mindfulness inventory. Personality and Individual Differences, 46(2), 224–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2008.10.009.CrossRef

Lacerda, A., Dalgalarrondo, P., Caetano, D., Haas, G., Camargo, E., & Keshavan, M. (2003). Neuropsychological performance and regional cerebral blood flow in obsessive–compulsive disorder. Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry, 27(4), 657–665. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0278-5846(03)00076-9.CrossRefPubMed

Langer, E. J. (2000). Mindful learning. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9(6), 220–223. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00099.CrossRef

Luciano, C., Valdivia-Salas, S., & Ruiz, F. (2012). The self as the context for rule-governed behavior. In L. McHugh & I. Stewart (Eds.), The self and perspective taking: contributions and applications from modern behavioral science (pp. 143–160). Oakland: New Harbinger Publications.

Matthews, B. A., Shimoff, E., Catania, A. C., & Sagvolden, T. (1977). Uninstructed human responding: sensitivity to ratio and interval contingencies. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 27(3), 453–467.CrossRef

McAuliffe, D., Hughes, S., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2014). The dark-side of rule governed behavior. Behavior Modification, 38(4), 587–613. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145445514521630.CrossRefPubMed

McHugh, L., Procter, J., Herzog, M., Schock, A.-K., & Reed, P. (2012). The effect of mindfulness on extinction and behavioral resurgence. Learning & Behavior, 40(4), 405–415. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13420-011-0062-2.CrossRef

Monestès, J., Villatte, M., Stewart, I., & Loas, G. (2014). Rule-based insensitivity and delusion maintenance in schizophrenia. The Psychological Record, 64(2), 329–338. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-014-0029-8.CrossRef

Monestès, J., Greville, W., & Hooper, N. (2017). Derived insensitivity: rule-based insensitivity to contingencies propagates through equivalence. Learning and Motivation, 59, 55–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lmot.2017.08.003.CrossRef

Needleman, L. D., & Cushman, C. (2010). Mindfulness in cognitive-behavioral therapy. In S. G. Hofmann & M. A. Reinecke (Eds.), Cognitive-behavioral therapy with adults: a guide to empirically-informed assessment and intervention (pp. 163–179). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

O’Hora, D., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2004). Instructional control: developing a relational frame analysis. Int J Psychol Psychol Ther, 4(2), 263–284.

Plumb, J. C., Stewart, I., Dahl, J., & Lundgren, T. (2009). In search of meaning: values in modern clinical behavior analysis. Behav Anal, 32(1), 85–103. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03392177.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Poppen, R. L. (1989). Some clinical implications of rule-governed behavior. In S. C. Hayes (Ed.), Rule-governed behavior: cognition, contingencies and instructional control (pp. 325–358). New York: Plenum Press.CrossRef

Reese, H. W. (1989). Rule-governed behavior: cognitive and behavioristic views. In S. C. Hayes (Ed.), Rule-governed behavior: cognition, contingencies and instructional control (pp. 3–84). New York: Plenum Press.CrossRef

Rosenfarb, I. S., Newland, M. C., Brannon, S. E., & Howey, D. S. (1992). Effects of self-generated rules on the development of schedule-controlled behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 58(1), 107–121.CrossRef

Ruiz, F., Suárez-Falcón, J., Barbero-Rubio, A., & Flórez, C. (2018). Development and initial validation of the generalized pliance questionnaire. J Contextual Behav Sci. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2018.03.003.

Schultz, P. W., & Searleman, A. (2002). Rigidity of thought and behavior: 100 years of research. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 128(2), 165–207.PubMed

Shimoff, E., Catania, A. C., & Matthews, B. A. (1981). Uninstructed human responding: sensitivity of low-rate performance to schedule contingencies. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 36(2), 207–220.CrossRef

Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., & Simonsohn, U. (2012). A 21 word solution. Retrieved from https://ssrn.com/abstract=2160588.

Steingroever, H., Wetzels, R., Horstmann, A., Neumann, J., & Wagenmakers, E.-J. (2013). Performance of healthy participants on the Iowa gambling task. Psychological Assessment, 25(1), 180–193. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029929.CrossRefPubMed

Strauss, E., Sherman, E. M., & Spreen, O. (2006). Executive functions. In A compendium of neuropsychological tests: administration, norms, and commentary (3rd ed., pp. 401–545). New York: Oxford University Press.

Tchanturia, K., Davies, H., Roberts, M., Harrison, A., Nakazato, M., Schmidt, U., et al. (2012). Poor cognitive flexibility in eating disorders: examining the evidence using the Wisconsin card sorting task. PLoS One, 7(1), e28331. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0028331.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Törneke, N., Luciano, C., & Valdivia-Salas, S. (2008). Rule-governed behavior and psychological problems. International Journal of Psychology and Psychological Therapy, 8(2), 141–156.

Turnbull, O., Evans, C., Kemish, K., Park, S., & Bowman, C. (2006). A novel set-shifting modification of the Iowa gambling task: flexible emotion-based learning in schizophrenia. Neuropsychology, 20(3), 290. https://doi.org/10.1037/0894-4105.20.3.290.CrossRefPubMed

Van Dam, N. T., van Vugt, M. K., Vago, D. R., Schmalzl, L., Saron, C. D., Olendzki, A., et al. (2017). Mind the hype: a critical evaluation and prescriptive agenda for research on mindfulness and meditation. Perspectives on Psychological Science: A Journal of the Association for Psychological Science, 13(1), 36–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691617709589.CrossRefPubMed

Walach, H., Buchheld, N., Buttenmüller, V., Kleinknecht, N., & Schmidt, S. (2006). Measuring mindfulness—the Freiburg mindfulness inventory (FMI). Personality and Individual Differences, 40(8), 1543–1555. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2005.11.025.CrossRef

World Medical Association. (2013). Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA, 310(20), 2191–2194. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2013.281053.CrossRef

Wulfert, E., Greenway, D. E., Farkas, P., Hayes, S. C., & Dougher, M. J. (1994). Correlation between self-reported rigidity and rule-governed insensitivity to operant contingencies. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27(4), 659–671. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1994.27-659.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Zettle, R. D., & Hayes, S. C. (1982). Rule-governed behavior: a potential theoretical framework for cognitive-behavior therapy. In P. C. Kendall (Ed.), Advances in cognitive-behavioral research and therapy (pp. 71–118). New York: Academic Press.

Titel: Generalized Pliance in Relation to Contingency Insensitivity and Mindfulness
Auteurs: Martin O’Connor
Philip Byrne
Francisco J. Ruiz
Louise McHugh
Publicatiedatum: 29-10-2018
Uitgeverij: Springer US
Gepubliceerd in: Mindfulness / Uitgave 5/2019
Print ISSN: 1868-8527
Elektronisch ISSN: 1868-8535
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-018-1046-5

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Andere artikelen Uitgave 5/2019

What Can We Learn from Randomized Clinical Trials About the Construct Validity of Self-Report Measures of Mindfulness? A Meta-Analysis

Mobile Mindfulness Meditation: a Randomised Controlled Trial of the Effect of Two Popular Apps on Mental Health

Mindfulness Predicts Driver Engagement in Distracting Activities

Facets of Mindfulness in Adults with Generalized Anxiety Disorder and Impact of Co-occurring Depression

Linking Mothers’ Difficulties in Emotion Regulation to Children/Adolescents’ Emotional Eating in Pediatric Obesity: the Mediating Role of Mindful Parenting and Children/Adolescents’ Depressive Symptoms

Modes of Processing Trauma: Self-Compassion Buffers Affective Guilt