The therapeutic efficacy of distraction as a pain management strategy is the subject of heated controversy. The fact that people are multifunctional, and that behavior requires numerous body systems in specific situations is reflected in attentional systems. An attentional system must be able to deal with settings that are partially or completely unexpected, change quickly, and have many, conflicting, or contradicting goals

I’m working on a psychology multi-part question and need an explanation to help me understand better.

 

Get Your Custom Essay Written From Scratch
We have worked on a similar problem. If you need help click order now button and submit your assignment instructions.
Just from $9/Page
Order Now

I have the literature review done I just need part two of the research gap done and the powerpoint to go along with it.

 

UNFORMATTED ATTACHMENT PREVIEW

Running head: RUNNING HEAD 1 Title First Name Last Name Institution RUNNING HEAD 2 In the late 1950s and early 1960s, the cognitive approach began to change psychology, eventually becoming the dominant approach in psychology by the late 1970s. Tolman proposed that learning was dependent on the formation of links between stimuli. These connections were referred to as cognitive maps by him. Within the study of cognitive psychology, it can connect to attention and pain. Independent of pain severity and pertinent demographic characteristics, regression analysis revealed that pain attention remained a significant predictor of distress, disability, and health-care consumption (McCracken 2006). These findings give early evidence for a behavioral model of pain attention (McCracken 2006). Even though attentional processes are critical in pain perception and behavior, no theory or model explaining how and why pain catches and keeps attention has been created (Eccleston and Crombez 1999). Attention and pain are explored in the pain literature despite the lack of a model or theory. The therapeutic efficacy of distraction as a pain management strategy is the subject of heated controversy. The fact that people are multifunctional, and that behavior requires numerous body systems in specific situations is reflected in attentional systems. An attentional system must be able to deal with settings that are partially or completely unexpected, change quickly, and have many, conflicting, or contradicting goals. If novelty is a key feature of pain’s disruptiveness, changing one’s experience with the pain and knowledge of its beginning should have an impact on the pain’s potential to disturb current attentional involvement. Anticipating impending pain causes anticipatory reactions and increases access to consciousness by prioritizing cues that may herald the presence of the danger item (Eccleston and Crombez 1999). The act of choosing pain is disruptive to ongoing attention and activity. People can learn which elements predict the entrance of pain into focus attention by analyzing the interruptive effects of pain selection (Eccleston and Crombez 1999). So far, they RUNNING HEAD 3 have looked at elements that are predominantly related to pain. Even after adjusting for affective distress, self-reported high-intensity pain is more disruptive than self-reported low-intensity pain in chronic pain. The onset of pain and the interruption of attentional involvement are aided by novelty and unpredictability. Interruption by pain is mediated by threat. The mere fear of pain will encourage the appearance of pain-related stimuli. People who evaluate pain-related cues as dangerous and very likely to result in disaster are especially vulnerable to the influence of pain threat encouraging the onset of pain (Eccleston and Crombez 1999). Finally, increased somatic awareness promotes the entrance of high-intensity pain into the center of attention. Negative emotion caused heightened sensitivity to internal somatic cues, as seen by quicker detection of altered physical symptoms. As a result, unpleasant emotion may cause self-concentration, and this concentration on oneself may facilitate symptom identification and experience. As a result, concentrating attention on the self should raise awareness of self-aspects and, as a result, bodily self-experience. The combined impact theory is based on the following logic: Negative emotion can draw attention to bodily activity, making it a temporarily significant feature of the self (Gendolla et., al 2005). However, to make somatic activity a prominent self-aspect that is easily accessible and powerfully experienced, self-focused attention is required. Because positive affect does not have the ability to focus attention to somatic activity, it will not be related with increased symptom experience. The fact that both negative affect and somatic symptoms relate to sickness, although positive affect is not, is likely one reason why negative affect but not positive affect might make the physical self suddenly significant (Gendolla et., al 2005). Self-focused attention, mood, contemporary symptom experience, and the trait variables neuroticism and chronic symptom experience were all examined in a questionnaire given to university students. The researchers expected increased symptom experience only if negative RUNNING HEAD 4 mood was paired with self-focus, according to the joint effect theory. After accounting for the impacts of the dispositional measures, this impact should remain substantial. The findings back our assumptions concerning the effects of low mood and self-focused attention on the sensation of physical symptoms in the moment. While in a bad mood, those who concentrated on their intimate sides of themselves reported the most acute symptom experience. The interaction between mood and self-focus, as expected, reduced the large main effects. As a result, our data show that these major impacts are due to the interplay of excessive self-focus and low mood, which only becomes apparent when their interaction is considered. Distraction can be effective when pain is low intensity, but not when pain is high intensity, according to McCaul and Mallott (Eccleston and Crombez 1999). They also concluded that the efficacy of a distraction strategy is contingent on the activity being challenging enough to divert resources from pain processing. The contexts in which pain manifests present a wide range of demands and disruptions. When the coherence of an action sequence is disrupted by pain, a strong desire to finish the original interrupted series of activities emerges. Chronic pain is a situation in which the source of pain cannot be removed and there is no way to escape the suffering. If the recurrent selection of pain does not result in escape, one could anticipate the choosing of pain to end. Clinical observation and the preceding study, however, show that pain selection persists: Chronic pain indicates that present attentional involvement is disrupted on a regular basis. This persistent interruption, according to the idea, is a normal process of selecting pain for escape rather than the emergence of a disordered habit of response. The establishment of a clinical pattern of high symptom reporting is one of the effects of chronic interruption for many patients with chronic pain. Chronic pain, unlike the therapy of specific anxieties and phobias, is an environment that sends out a lot of warning signs. The determination of the dangerous signals RUNNING HEAD 5 of pain for each individual will be important to the effectiveness of exposure with chronic-pain sufferers. The idea of being in a throng of people or riding on a rough road are two specific instances for chronic low-back-pain patients. The issue for clinical researchers will be to design appropriate treatment approaches that allow generalization of the effects across settings and time due to the enormous number of possible signals of threat and the significance of describing the signals of threat for everyone. Many people’s lives are impacted by pain, which causes physical, psychological, and financial hardships. The capacity to maintain focus is a vital psychological trait that is badly affected by pain. We used the psychomotor vigilance task, thought probes, and pupillometry in three trials to better understand the influence of pain on sustained attention. With Experiment 1, participants in intense pain performed worse on the task overall (Ellis et al., 2018). This impact, however, was limited to the relative frequency and length of the individuals’ slowest reactions, with their quicker reactions being comparable to those of a pain-free control group. We repeated Experiment 2 but added periodic thought probes to openly quantify subjective sensations during the task. In pain, participants reported having fewer “on-task” thoughts and more thoughts focused on the source of their suffering (Ellis et al., 2018). In Experiment 3, they repeated the technique while utilizing an eye-tracker to measure pupillary changes (Ellis et al., 2018). Task elicited pupillary responses were smaller in pain participants, which is regarded to be a sign of task involvement. However, in Experiment 3, the behavioral effects of pain from Experiments 1 and 2 were not repeated (Ellis et al., 2018). Pain resulted with poorer performance in the form of an increase in the relative frequency and severity of sluggish answers, an increase in off-task thinking, and a decrease in a physiological sign of task engagement when taken combined. These findings support beliefs about how pain competes for attention with task goals and has a RUNNING HEAD 6 detrimental influence on behavior. The discovery of a low-level process through which pain might interfere with normal cognitive functioning has larger ramifications (Ellis et al., 2018). Those with a repressive coping style, unlike most individuals, report high levels of physical pain but low levels of emotional anguish, a disparity that might indicate a “conversion” process (Burns and Quartana 2010). Researchers investigated an attention allocation hypothesis in two investigations, arguing that during emotionally stimulating conditions, repressors divert attention away from harmful negative affective information and toward nonthreatening physical pain information. In Study 1, 84 people were given a cold pressor and subsequently had to recover (Burns and Quartana 2010). During recuperation, repressors reported more pain than low- and high-anxious individuals, but less distress than high-anxious people. Significant and big disparities between high pain and low distress were reported by repressors, but these differences were less prominent in other groups. In Study 2, 77 people were put through an ischemia pain task while doing a modified dot-probe task using sensory and negative affective pain words as inputs (Burns and Quartana 2010). As the pain task progressed, repressors showed growing biases away from emotional pain words and toward sensory pain words, but low- and highanxious individuals exhibited no such shifts in attention. The findings back with the theory that repressor conversion is a process in which attention is diverted away from emotional discomfort during noxious stimuli and instead focuses on sensory information from pain (Burns and Quartana 2010). 7 RUNNING HEAD References Burns, J., & Quartana, P. (2010). Europe PMC. https://europepmc.org/article/MED/21171754. Eccleston, C., & Crombez, G. (1999). Pain demands attention: A cognitive-affective model of the interruptive function of pain. the University of Bath’s research portal. https://researchportal.bath.ac.uk/en/publications/pain-demands-attention-a-cognitiveaffective-model-of-the-interru. Ellis, D., Brewer, G., Robison, M., & Laboratory, M. & A. C. (2018, September 21). Acute pain impairs sustained attention. OSF. https://osf.io/cx7ej/#! Gendolla, G. H. E., Abele, A. E., Andrei, A., Spurk, D., & Richter, M. (2005, June). Negative mood, self-focused attention, and the experience of physical symptoms: the joint impact hypothesis. Emotion (Washington, D.C.). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15982079. McCracken, L. M. (2006, March 2). “Attention” to pain in persons with chronic pain: A behavioral approach. Behavior Therapy. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0005789497800470. Running head: RUNNING HEAD 1 Title First Name Last Name Institution RUNNING HEAD 2 Within the study of cognitive psychology, it can connect to attention and pain. Independent of pain severity and pertinent demographic characteristics, regression analysis revealed that pain attention remained a significant predictor of distress, disability, and healthcare consumption (McCracken 2006). These findings give early evidence for a behavioral model of pain attention (McCracken 2006). Even though attentional processes are critical in pain perception and behavior, no theory or model explaining how and why pain catches and keeps attention has been created (Eccleston and Crombez 1999). Attention and pain are explored in the pain literature despite the lack of a model or theory. The therapeutic efficacy of distraction as a pain management strategy is the subject of heated controversy If novelty is a key feature of pain’s disruptiveness, changing one’s experience with the pain and knowledge of its beginning should have an impact on the pain’s potential to disturb current attentional involvement. People can learn which elements predict the entrance of pain into focus attention by analyzing the interruptive effects of pain selection (Eccleston and Crombez 1999). So far, they have looked at elements that are predominantly related to pain. Even after adjusting for affective distress, self-reported high-intensity pain is more disruptive than self-reported low-intensity pain in chronic pain. Interruption by pain is mediated by threat. The mere fear of pain will encourage the appearance of pain-related stimuli. People who evaluate pain-related cues as dangerous and very likely to result in disaster are especially vulnerable to the influence of pain threat encouraging the onset of pain (Eccleston and Crombez 1999). Negative emotion caused heightened sensitivity to internal somatic cues, as seen by quicker detection of altered physical symptoms. As a result, unpleasant emotion may cause selfconcentration, and this concentration on oneself may facilitate symptom identification and RUNNING HEAD 3 experience. As a result, concentrating attention on the self should raise awareness of self-aspects and, as a result, bodily self-experience. The combined impact theory is based on the following logic: Negative emotion can draw attention to bodily activity, making it a temporarily significant feature of the self (Gendolla et., al 2005). The researchers expected increased symptom experience only if negative mood was paired with self-focus, according to the joint effect theory. After accounting for the impacts of the dispositional measures, this impact should remain substantial. The findings back our assumptions concerning the effects of low mood and self-focused attention on the sensation of physical symptoms in the moment. While in a bad mood, those who concentrated on their intimate sides of themselves reported the most acute symptom experience. The interaction between mood and self-focus, as expected, reduced the large main effects. As a result, our data show that these major impacts are due to the interplay of excessive self-focus and low mood, which only becomes apparent when their interaction is considered. Distraction can be effective when pain is low intensity, but not when pain is high intensity, according to McCaul and Mallott (Eccleston and Crombez 1999). They also concluded that the efficacy of a distraction strategy is contingent on the activity being challenging enough to divert resources from pain processing. The contexts in which pain manifests present a wide range of demands and disruptions. When the coherence of an action sequence is disrupted by pain, a strong desire to finish the original interrupted series of activities emerges. Clinical observation and the preceding study, however, show that pain selection persists: Chronic pain indicates that present attentional involvement is disrupted on a regular basis. This persistent interruption, according to the idea, is a normal process of selecting pain for escape rather than the emergence of a disordered habit of response. The establishment of a clinical pattern of high RUNNING HEAD 4 symptom reporting is one of the effects of chronic interruption for many patients with chronic pain. Chronic pain, unlike the therapy of specific anxieties and phobias, is an environment that sends out a lot of warning signs. The determination of the dangerous signals of pain for each individual will be important to the effectiveness of exposure with chronic-pain sufferers. The idea of being in a throng of people or riding on a rough road are two specific instances for chronic low-back-pain patients. The issue for clinical researchers will be to design appropriate treatment approaches that allow generalization of the effects across settings and time due to the enormous number of possible signals of threat and the significance of describing the signals of threat for everyone. Many people’s lives are impacted by pain, which causes physical, psychological, and financial hardships. With Experiment 1, participants in intense pain performed worse on the task overall (Ellis et al., 2018). This impact, however, was limited to the relative frequency and length of the individuals’ slowest reactions, with their quicker reactions being comparable to those of a pain-free control group. In Experiment 3, they repeated the technique while utilizing an eyetracker to measure pupillary changes (Ellis et al., 2018). Task elicited pupillary responses were smaller in pain participants, which is regarded to be a sign of task involvement. However, in Experiment 3, the behavioral effects of pain from Experiments 1 and 2 were not repeated (Ellis et al., 2018). Pain resulted with poorer performance in the form of an increase in the relative frequency and severity of sluggish answers, an increase in off-task thinking, and a decrease in a physiological sign of task engagement when taken combined. These findings support beliefs about how pain competes for attention with task goals and has a detrimental influence on behavior. The discovery of a low-level process through which pain might interfere with normal cognitive functioning has larger ramifications (Ellis et al., 2018). 5 RUNNING HEAD Researchers investigated an attention allocation hypothesis in two investigations, arguing that during emotionally stimulating conditions, repressors divert attention away from harmful negative affective information and toward nonthreatening physical pain information. In Study 1, 84 people were given a cold pressor and subsequently had to recover (Burns and Quartana 2010). During recuperation, repressors reported more pain than low- and high-anxious individuals, but less distress than high-anxious people. References Burns, J., & Quartana, P. (2010). Europe PMC. https://europepmc.org/article/MED/21171754. Eccleston, C., & Crombez, G. (1999). Pain demands attention: A cognitive-affective model of the interruptive function of pain. the University of Bath’s research portal. https://researchportal.bath.ac.uk/en/publications/pain-demands-attention-a-cognitiveaffective-model-of-the-interru. Ellis, D., Brewer, G., Robison, M., & Laboratory, M. & A. C. (2018, September 21). Acute pain impairs sustained attention. OSF. https://osf.io/cx7ej/#! Gendolla, G. H. E., Abele, A. E., Andrei, A., Spurk, D., & Richter, M. (2005, June). Negative mood, self-focused attention, and the experience of physical symptoms: the joint impact RUNNING HEAD hypothesis. Emotion (Washington, D.C.). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15982079. McCracken, L. M. (2006, March 2). “Attention” to pain in persons with chronic pain: A behavioral approach. Behavior Therapy. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0005789497800470. 6 Running head: PAPER TITLE 1 Paper Title Full Name Southern New Hampshire University PAPER TITLE 2 Literature Review In this section, summarize the studies you reviewed for your chosen topic. Summarize how the evidence in that literature and in the text relates to key aspects of cognition and explains how cognitive processes influence human behavior. Explain how the view of cognition has evolved over the history of the field, using examples from your references to do so. Explain conclusions that can be reached about cognitive psychology based on the research you explored, and use examples from that research. Describe the specific research designs used in the studies you …
Purchase answer to see full attachment
Student has agreed that all tutoring, explanations, and answers provided by the tutor will be used to help in the learning process and in accordance with Studypool’s honor code & terms of service.
Do you need a similar assignment done for you from scratch? We have qualified writers to help you
Use our paper writing service to score better and meet your deadlines.
Order Now