Cited by 60Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationAttachment and Relationship DynamicsPediatric Pain Management Techniques

Perceived entitlement to pain-related support and pain catastrophizing: associations with perceived and observed support.

Open access
Cano, Annmarie, Leong, Laura, Heller, Jaclyn B., Lutz, Jillian R.·2009·Pain

Abstract

Studies on the determinants of pain-related support are needed to enhance couples-based treatments for pain. The purpose of this study was to determine the extent to which pain catastrophizing and perceived entitlement to pain-related support (i.e., support entitlement) were associated with perceived and observed social support. Participants were 106 chronic pain couples recruited from the community. They completed surveys as well as an observational discussion task. Greater support entitlement in persons with pain was correlated positively with pain catastrophizing, punishing spouse responses, and observed spousal invalidation but negatively correlated with perceived spousal support, solicitous spouse responses, and observed validation. Catastrophizing was correlated with perceptions of general spousal support but not the other support variables. Hierarchical regression analyses demonstrated that among persons with lower levels of support entitlement, catastrophizing was associated with greater solicitous spouse responses. Among those with a greater entitlement to support, catastrophizing was associated with greater punishing spouse responses and observed invalidation by the spouse. These results suggest that support entitlement plays an important role in couples' supportive interactions about pain. Continued research is needed to determine how a desire for pain-related attention and support and catastrophizing translate into behaviors that affect support provision and receipt.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.pain.2009.09.023

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Several studies have coded validation in chronic pain patient-partner interactions using the Validation and Invalidation Behavioral Coding System (VIBCS).

    “A number of studies have used the Validation and Invalidation Behavioral Coding System (VIBCS[7]) to code validation occurring in interactions between patients with chronic pain and their partners.[1–3]”
  • When partners gave more validation, patients disclosed more and reported less support entitlement.

    “Third, in couples where the partner provided higher levels of validation, patients were much more likely to engage in disclosure and much less likely to report a sense of support entitlement.”
  • Several studies have coded validation in chronic pain patient-partner interactions using the Validation and Invalidation Behavioral Coding System (VIBCS).

    “A number of studies have used the Validation and Invalidation Behavioral Coding System (VIBCS[7]) to code validation occurring in interactions between patients with chronic pain and their partners.[1–3]”
  • These behaviors were distinct from other spousal responses, including partner solicitousness.

    “Second, these behaviors were found to be distinct from other spousal responses such as partner solicitousness.”
  • When partners gave more validation, patients disclosed more and reported less support entitlement.

    “Third, in couples where the partner provided higher levels of validation, patients were much more likely to engage in disclosure and much less likely to report a sense of support entitlement.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [9]Cutrona CE Russell D Sarason IG Sarason BR Pierce GR Type of social support and specific stress: Toward a theory of optimal matching, in Social support: An interactional view 1990 Wiley New York 319 366
  2. [25]Morley S Doyle K Beese A Devor M Rowbotham M Wiesenfeld-Hallin Z Talking to others about pain: Suffering in silence, in Proceedings of the ninth world congress on pain: Progress in pain research and management 2000 IASP Press Seattle 1123 1129

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cano, A., Leong, L., Heller, J. B., & Lutz, J. R.
Affiliations
Wayne State University (US)
Venue
Pain
Published
2009-12
Volume
147
Issue
1
Pages
249-254
ISSN
0304-3959 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2129417913
Cited by
60
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 7
FWCI
3.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Pain (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Human Biology (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (K01MH066975)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Pediatric Pain Management Techniques
Keywords
pain catastrophizing, chronic pain, couples, spousal support, social support
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Aged, Chronic Disease, Disability Evaluation, Female, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Middle Aged, Pain, Pain Measurement, Personality Inventory, Surveys and Questionnaires, Regression Analysis, Severity of Illness Index, Social Support, Spouses

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