Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Measuring Beliefs About Distraction: Might the Function of Distraction Matter More than Distraction Itself?

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Cognitive Therapy and Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Distraction is often discouraged in exposure therapy for anxiety disorders, but little is known about how beliefs about distraction may impact treatment outcome (with or without distraction). One barrier to understanding the impact of these beliefs is the lack of an available measure to assess this construct. In addition to proposing a theoretical basis for beliefs about distraction, we created and validated a questionnaire assessing maladaptive beliefs about distraction, the Beliefs about Distraction Inventory. An exploratory factor analysis with an unselected student sample (N = 506, 86 % female) suggested a two-factor solution, conceptualized as “distraction is necessary”, and “distraction is effective”. A confirmatory factor analysis using a contamination-fearful sample (N = 132, 87 % female) demonstrated adequate model fit. In both samples, the measure exhibited strong reliability and validity. Preliminary findings revealed that beliefs that “distraction is necessary” were more strongly associated with anxious psychopathology than beliefs that “distraction is effective”. Results are discussed in terms of cognitive-behavioural theories and therapies for anxiety and related disorders.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The final version of the BADI (including the instructions and distraction techniques checklist) is available free of charge from either author for public use.

References

  • Antony, M. M., Bieling, P. J., Cox, B. J., Enns, M. W., & Swinson, R. P. (1998). Psychometric properties of the 42-item and 21-item versions of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales in clinical groups and a community sample. Psychological Assessment, 10, 176–181. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.10.2.176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Antony, M. M., McCabe, R. E., Leeuw, I., Sano, N., & Swinson, R. P. (2001). Effect of distraction and coping style on in vivo exposure for specific phobia of spiders. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 39, 1137–1150. doi:10.1016/S0005-7967(00)00089-9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bados, A., Balaguer, G., & Saldaña, C. (2007). The efficacy of cognitive-behavioral therapy and the problem of drop-out. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 63, 585–592. doi:10.1002/jclp.20368.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191–215. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1988). Self-efficacy conception of anxiety. Anxiety Research, 1, 77–98. doi:10.1080/10615808808248222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beck, A. T., & Steer, R. A. (1990). Beck Anxiety Inventory manual. Toronto: Psychological Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, A. T., Steer, R. A., & Brown, G. K. (1996). Manual for the beck depression inventory-II. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bentler, P. M., & Chou, C. P. (1987). Practical issues in structural modeling. Sociological Methods & Research, 16, 78–117. doi:10.1177/0049124187016001004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, B. M. (1989). A primer of LISREL: Basic applications and programming for confirmatory factor analytic models. New York, NY: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Carver, C. S. (1997). You want to measure coping but your protocol’s too long: Consider the Brief COPE. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 4, 92–100. doi:10.1207/s15327558ijbm0401_6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Creamer, M., Foran, J., & Bell, R. (1995). The Beck Anxiety Inventory in a non-clinical sample. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 33, 477–485. doi:10.1016/0005-7967(94)00082-U.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • de Winter, J. C. F., & Dodou, D. (2012). Factor recovery by principal axis factoring and maximum likelihood factor analysis as a function of factor pattern and sample size. Journal of Applied Statistics, 39, 695–710. doi:10.1080/02664763.2011.610445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS (3rd ed.). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foa, E. B., & Kozak, M. J. (1986). Emotional processing of fear: Exposure to corrective information. Psychological Bulletin, 99, 20–35. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.99.1.20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gosselin, P., Langlois, F., Freeston, M. H., Ladouceur, R., Dugas, M. J., & Pelletier, O. (2002). Le Questionnaire d’évitement cognitif (QEC): Développement et validation auprès d’adultes et d’adolescents [The Cognitive Avoidance Questionnaire (CAQ): Development and validation among adult and adolescent samples]. Journal de Thérapie Comportementale et Cognitive, 12, 24–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hazlett-Stevens, H., Ullman, J. B., & Craske, M. G. (2004). Factor structure of the Penn State Worry Questionnaire: Examination of a method factor. Assessment, 11, 361–370. doi:10.1177/1073191104269872.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Helbig-Lang, S., & Petermann, F. (2010). Tolerate or eliminate? A systematic review on the effects of safety behavior across anxiety disorders. Clinical Psychology Science and Practice, 17, 218–233. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2850.2010.01213.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henry, J. D., & Crawford, J. R. (2005). The short-form version of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS-21): Construct validity and normative data in a large non-clinical sample. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 44, 227–239. doi:10.1348/014466505X29657.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • John, O. P., Donahue, E. M., & Kentle, R. L. (1991). The big five inventory—Versions 4a and 54. Berkeley: University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Personality and Social Research.

  • Johnstone, K. A., & Page, A. C. (2004). Attention to phobic stimuli during exposure: The effect of distraction on anxiety reduction, self-efficacy and perceived control. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 42, 249–275. doi:10.1016/S0005-7967(03)00137-2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kamphuis, J. H., & Telch, M. J. (2000). Effects of distraction and guided threat reappraisal on fear reduction during exposure-based treatments for specific fears. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 38, 1163–1181. doi:10.1016/S0005-7967(99)00147-3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loehlin, J. C. (1992). Latent variable models: An introduction to factor, path, and structural analysis (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lovibond, S. H., & Lovibond, P. F. (1995). Manual for the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (2nd ed.). Sydney: Psychology Foundation of Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, S. M. (1980). When is a little information a dangerous thing? Coping with stressful life-events by monitoring vs. blunting. In S. Levine, & H. Ursin (Eds.), Coping and health, (pp. 145–169). New York: Plenum Press.

  • Miller, S. M. (1987). Monitoring and blunting: Validation of a questionnaire to assess styles of information seeking under threat. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 345–353. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.52.2.345.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mulaik, S. A., James, L. R., Van Alstine, J., Bennett, N., Lind, S., & Stilwell, C. D. (1989). Evaluation of goodness-of-fit indices for structural equation models. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 430–445. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.105.3.430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muris, P., de Jong, P., Merckelbach, H., & van Zuuren, F. J. (1993a). Monitoring coping style and exposure outcome in spider phobics. Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 21, 329–333. doi:10.1017/S1352465800011656.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muris, P., de Jong, P., Merckelbach, H., & van Zuuren, F. J. (1993b). Is exposure therapy outcome affected by a monitoring coping style? Advances in Behaviour Research and Therapy, 15, 291–300. doi:10.1016/0146-6402(93)90014-S.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muris, P., van Zuuren, F. J., de Jong, P. J., de Beurs, E., & Hanewald, G. (1994). Monitoring and blunting coping styles: The Miller Behavioural Style Scale and its correlates, and the development of an alternative questionnaire. Personality and Individual Differences, 17, 9–19. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(94)90257-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nolen-Hoeksema, S. (1991). Responses to depression questionnaire. Unpublished manuscript, Department of Psychology, Stanford University, Stanford, California.

  • Oliver, N. S., & Page, A. C. (2008). Effects of internal and external distraction and focus during exposure to blood-injury-injection stimuli. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 22, 283–291. doi:10.1016/j.janxdis.2007.01.006.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Parrish, C. L., Radomsky, A. S., & Dugas, M. J. (2008). Anxiety-control strategies: Is there room for neutralization in successful exposure treatment? Clinical Psychology Review, 28, 1400–1412. doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2008.07.007.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Radomsky, A. S., Ouimet, A. J., Ashbaugh, A. R., Lavoie, S. L., Parrish, C. L., & O’Connor, K. P. (2006). Psychometric properties of the French and English versions of the Vancouver Obsessional Compulsive Inventory and the Symmetry Ordering and Arranging Questionnaire. Cognitive Behaviour Therapy, 35, 164–173. doi:10.1080/16506070600827198.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rodebaugh, T. L., Woods, C. M., & Heimberg, R. G. (2007). The reverse of social anxiety is not always the opposite: The reverse-scored items of the social interaction anxiety scale do not belong. Behavior Therapy, 38, 192–206. doi:10.1016/j.beth.2006.08.001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez, B. I., & Craske, M. G. (1993). The effects of distraction during exposure to phobic stimuli. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 31, 549–558. doi:10.1016/0005-7967(93)90106-5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rose, M. P., & McGlynn, F. D. (1997). Toward a standard experiment for studying post-treatment return of fear. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 11, 263–277. doi:10.1016/S0887-6185(97)00010-8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Salkovskis, P. M. (1991). The importance of behaviour in the maintenance of anxiety and panic: A cognitive account. Behavioural Psychotherapy, 19, 6–19. doi:10.1017/S0141347300011472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salkovskis, P. M., Clark, D. M., & Gelder, M. G. (1996). Cognitive-behaviour links in the persistence of panic. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 37, 559–574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmid-Leuz, B., Elsesser, K., Lohrmann, T., Jöhren, P., & Sartory, G. (2007). Attention focusing versus distraction during exposure in dental phobia. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 45, 2691–2703. doi:10.1016/j.brat.2007.07.004.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sexton, K. A., & Dugas, M. J. (2008). The cognitive avoidance questionnaire: Validation of the English translation. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 22, 355–370. doi:10.1016/j.janxdis.2007.04.005.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Steketee, G., Bransfield, S., Miller, S. M., & Foa, E. B. (1989). The effect of information and coping style on the reduction of phobic anxiety during exposure. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 3, 69–85. doi:10.1016/0887-6185(89)90002-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, J. P. (2009). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences (5th ed.). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Telch, M. J., Valentiner, D. P., Ilai, D., Young, P. R., Powers, M. B., & Smits, J. A. J. (2004). Fear activation and distraction during emotional processing of claustrophobic fear. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 35, 219–232. doi:10.1016/j.jbtep.2004.03.004.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Thordarson, D. S., Radomsky, A. S., Rachman, S., Shafran, R., Sawchuk, C. N., & Hakstian, A. R. (2004). The Vancouver Obsessional Compulsive Inventory (VOCI). Behaviour Research and Therapy, 42, 1289–1314. doi:10.1016/j.brat.2003.08.007.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Thwaites, R., & Freeston, M. H. (2005). Safety-seeking behaviours: Fact or fiction? How can we clinically differentiate between safety behaviours and adaptive coping strategies across anxiety disorders? Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 33, 177–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tucker, L. R., & Lewis, C. (1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 38, 1–10. doi:10.1007/BF02291170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veale, D. (1999). Cognitive therapy in the treatment of obsessive-compulsive disorder. Advances in Psychiatric Treatment, 5, 61–70. doi:10.1192/apt.5.1.61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by a doctoral research award from the Canadian Institutes for Health Research which was awarded to the first author, and by a Canadian Institutes of Health Research operating grant awarded to the second author (FRN 119283). We would like to express our gratitude to Michael Lacoursiere, who assisted with data collection. We are also grateful to the anonymous reviewers who provided insightful comments and suggestions on an earlier version of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Concordia University, 7141 Sherbrooke Street W. (L-PY-146), Montreal, QC, H4B 1R6, Canada

    Jessica M. Senn & Adam S. Radomsky

Authors
  1. Jessica M. Senn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Adam S. Radomsky
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Adam S. Radomsky.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Senn and Radomsky declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Informed Consent

All procedures performed involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of Human Research Ethics Committee at Concordia University, the Canadian Psychological Association’s Code of Ethics for Psychologists, and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Animal Rights

No animal studies were carried out by the authors for this article.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Senn, J.M., Radomsky, A.S. Measuring Beliefs About Distraction: Might the Function of Distraction Matter More than Distraction Itself?. Cogn Ther Res 39, 826–840 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-015-9703-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-015-9703-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation