Cited by 158Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsPosttraumatic Stress Disorder Research

Effects of distraction and guided threat reappraisal on fear reduction during exposure-based treatments for specific fears

Kamphuis, Jan H, Telch, Michael J·2000·Behaviour Research and Therapy

Abstract

To test predictions derived from the emotional processing theory of fear reduction, claustrophobics (N = 58) were randomized to one of four exposure conditions: (a) exposure with guided threat reappraisal, (b) exposure with a cognitive load distracter task, (c) exposure with both guided threat reappraisal and cognitive load distracter task and (d) exposure without guided threat reappraisal or cognitive load distracter task. We hypothesized that self-guided in vivo exposure would lead to less fear reduction if performed simultaneously with a cognitive load distracter task that severely taxes information processing resources. In contrast, we hypothesized that focusing on core threats during exposure would enhance fear reduction. The main findings were largely consistent with predictions. The cognitive load task (regardless of focus of available attention) had a detrimental effect on fear reduction, while guided threat reappraisal (regardless of cognitive load) had a facilitative effect. The greatest level of fear reduction and the lowest level of return of fear were observed in the exposure condition involving guided threat reappraisal without cognitive load. Clinical implications and directions for future research are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0005-7967(99)00147-3

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kamphuis, J. H., & Telch, M. J.
Affiliations
The University of Texas at Austin (US)
Corresponding author
Kamphuis, Jan H
Venue
Behaviour Research and Therapy
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2000-12
Volume
38
Issue
12
Pages
1163-1181
ISSN
0005-7967 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2148093646
Cited by
158
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 13
FWCI
2.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Behaviour Research and Therapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
Keywords
fear reduction, distraction, cognitive load, claustrophobia, exposure therapy, emotional processing theory, return of fear, in vivo exposure, attentional focus
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Analysis of Variance, Desensitization, Psychologic, Fear, Female, Habituation, Psychophysiologic, Humans, Male, Models, Psychological, Phobic Disorders, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Treatment Outcome, Imagery, Psychotherapy

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