Cited by 247Pain Management and Placebo EffectPain Mechanisms and TreatmentsPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments

The effects of induced mood on laboratory pain.

Zelman, Diane C., Howland, Eric W., Nichols, Sharon N., Cleeland, Charles S.·1991·Pain

Abstract

Sixty-five subjects experienced 2 cold pressor immersions. Following the initial immersion, subjects participated in the Velten mood induction procedure by reading either depressive, neutral or elative statements. The sensory discriminative response to pain was measured by ratings of pain, and the affective-reactive response to pain was measured by pain tolerance. Pain tolerance, but not pain ratings, were affected by mood inductions with subjects in the depression condition shortening their tolerance times more than the subjects in the neutral condition and the subjects in the elative condition increasing their tolerance times.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0304-3959(91)90040-5

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The interpersonal process model of intimacy treats intimacy as resulting from a transactional process.

    “The interpersonal process model of intimacy[16; 17] views intimacy as the product of a transactional process.”

    From Validating pain communication: current state of the science (2015) · cites this paper as [17]

  • The interpersonal process model predicts that when partners validate patients after they disclose pain-related thoughts and feelings, patients will report greater intimacy, positive affect, and relationship satisfaction, which in turn may reduce reported pain.

    “The model (see Figure 1, Panel C) hypothesizes that when partners engage in validating behaviors after patients disclose pain-related thoughts and feelings, patients will report increased intimacy, positive affect, and relationship satisfaction; positive affective responses that in turn can lead to lower levels of reported pain.”

    From Validating pain communication: current state of the science (2015) · cites this paper as [17]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zelman, D. C., Howland, E. W., Nichols, S. N., & Cleeland, C. S.
Corresponding author
Cleeland, Charles S.
Venue
Pain
Published
1991-07
Volume
46
Issue
1
Pages
105-111
ISSN
0304-3959 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2022113580
Cited by
247
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 10
FWCI
1.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Pain (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5r01ns022677-07)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NS-22677)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Pain Management and Placebo Effect
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Pain Mechanisms and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Keywords
mood induction, pain tolerance, pain perception, depression
MeSH terms
Affect, Female, Humans, Male, Pain, Pain Measurement, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review