Part I. Experimental Studies: 2. Experiment in psychology 3. Experiments on perceiving III Experiments on imaging 4-8. Experiments on remembering: (a) The method of description (b) The method of repeated reproduction (c) The method of picture writing (d) The method of serial reproduction (e) The method of serial reproduction picture material 9. Perceiving, recognizing, remembering 10. A theory of remembering 11. Images and their functions 12. Meaning Part II. Remembering as a Study in Social Psychology: 13. Social psychology 14. Social psychology and the matter of recall 15. Social psychology and the manner of recall 16. Conventionalism 17. The notion of a collective unconscious 18. The basis of social recall 19. A summary and some conclusions.

Remembering. A Study in Experimental and Social Psychology, Cambridge (University Press) 1964.

Well-being : the foundations of hedonic psychology

In an attempt to explain how and why some individuals with musculoskeletal pain develop a chronic pain syndrome, Lethem et al. (Lethem J, Slade PD, Troup JDG, Bentley G. Outline of fear-avoidance model of exaggerated pain perceptions. Behav Res Ther 1983; 21: 401-408).ntroduced a so-called 'fear-avoidance' model. The central concept of their model is fear of pain. 'Confrontation' and 'avoidance' are postulated as the two extreme responses to this fear, of which the former leads to the reduction of fear over time. The latter, however, leads to the maintenance or exacerbation of fear, possibly generating a phobic state. In the last decade, an increasing number of investigations have corroborated and refined the fear-avoidance model. The aim of this paper is to review the existing evidence for the mediating role of pain-related fear, and its immediate and long-term consequences in the initiation and maintenance of chronic pain disability. We first highlight possible precursors of pain-related fear including the role negative appraisal of internal and external stimuli, negative affectivity and anxiety sensitivity may play. Subsequently, a number of fear-related processes will be discussed including escape and avoidance behaviors resulting in poor behavioral performance, hypervigilance to internal and external illness information, muscular reactivity, and physical disuse in terms of deconditioning and guarded movement. We also review the available assessment methods for the quantification of pain-related fear and avoidance. Finally, we discuss the implications of the recent findings for the prevention and treatment of chronic musculoskeletal pain. Although there are still a number of unresolved issues which merit future research attention, pain-related fear and avoidance appear to be an essential feature of the development of a chronic problem for a substantial number of patients with musculoskeletal pain.

/pdf/fear-avoidance-and-its-consequences-in-chronic-25jwj42o35.pdf

Fear-avoidance and its consequences in chronic musculoskeletal pain: a state of the art

&NA; In an attempt to explain how and why some individuals with musculoskeletal pain develop a chronic pain syndrome, Lethem et al.(Lethem J, Slade PD, Troup JDG, Bentley G. Outline of fear‐avoidance model of exaggerated pain perceptions. Behav Res Ther 1983; 21: 401‐408).ntroduced a so‐called ‘fear‐avoidance’ model. The central concept of their model is fear of pain. ‘Confrontation’ and ‘avoidance’ are postulated as the two extreme responses to this fear, of which the former leads to the reduction of fear over time. The latter, however, leads to the maintenance or exacerbation of fear, possibly generating a phobic state. In the last decade, an increasing number of investigations have corroborated and refined the fear‐avoidance model. The aim of this paper is to review the existing evidence for the mediating role of pain‐related fear, and its immediate and long‐term consequences in the initiation and maintenance of chronic pain disability. We first highlight possible precursors of pain‐related fear including the role negative appraisal of internal and external stimuli, negative affectivity and anxiety sensitivity may play. Subsequently, a number of fear‐related processes will be discussed including escape and avoidance behaviors resulting in poor behavioral performance, hypervigilance to internal and external illness information, muscular reactivity, and physical disuse in terms of deconditioning and guarded movement. We also review the available assessment methods for the quantification of pain‐related fear and avoidance. Finally, we discuss the implications of the recent findings for the prevention and treatment of chronic musculoskeletal pain. Although there are still a number of unresolved issues which merit future research attention, pain‐related fear and avoidance appear to be an essential feature of the development of a chronic problem for a substantial number of patients with musculoskeletal pain.

Fear-avoidance and its consequences in chronic musculoskeletal pain: a state of the art.

We hypothesize that there is a general bias, based on both innate predispositions and experience, in animals and humans, to give greater weight to negative entities (e.g., events, objects, personal traits). This is manifested in 4 ways: (a) negative potency (negative entities are stronger than the equivalent positive entities), (b) steeper nega tive gradients (the negativity of negative events grows more rapidly with approach to them in space or time than does the positivity of positive events, (c) negativity domi nance (combinations of negative and positive entities yield evaluations that are more negative than the algebraic sum of individual subjective valences would predict), and (d) negative differentiation (negative entities are more varied, yield more complex conceptual representations, and engage a wider response repertoire). We review evi dence for this taxonomy, with emphasis on negativity dominance, including literary, historical, religious, and cultural sources, as well as the psychological literatures on learning, attention, impression formation, contagion, moral judgment, development, and memory. We then consider a variety of theoretical accounts for negativity bias. We suggest that 1 feature of negative events that make them dominant is that negative entities are more contagious than positive entities.

/pdf/negativity-bias-negativity-dominance-and-contagion-2njh4nr8pi.pdf

Negativity Bias, Negativity Dominance, and Contagion

Once in contact always in contact: Evaluative conditioning is resistant to extinction

Avoidance of painful activities has been proposed to be an important risk factor for the initiation and maintenance of chronic low back suffering, whereas exposure to these activities has been suggested to be beneficial for recovery. In a cross-sectional study, the differences between chronic patients with avoidant and confrontational styles were investigated using self-report measures and a behavioral test. Participants were first classified as avoiders or confronters. In comparison with confronters, avoiders reported greater frequency and duration of pain, higher fear of pain and injury, more disability in daily living, and more attention to back sensations. Finally, avoiders reported more fear of (re)injury during the behavioral test and had a worse performance than confronters. The results suggest a close link between the fear of pain/(re)injury on one hand and avoidance behavior and physical deconditioning on the other hand.

Avoidance and Confrontation of Painful, Back-Straining Movements in Chronic Back Pain Patients

Expectancy-learning and evaluative learning in human classical conditioning: Differential effects of extinction

Expectancy-learning and evaluative learning in human classical conditioning: differential effects of extinction

Recent studies have shown that robust affective priming effects can be obtained when participants are required to categorize the targets on the basis of their valence, but not when participants are asked to categorize the targets on the basis of nonaffective features. On the basis of this pattern of results, it has been argued that affective priming is due to processes that operate at a response selection stage rather than to processes that operate at an encoding stage. We demonstrate (a) that affective priming of nonaffective semantic categorization responses can be obtained when participants assign attention to the affective stimulus dimension, and (b) that affective priming in the standard evaluative categorization task is strongly reduced when participants assign attention to nonaffective stimulus features. On the basis of these findings, we argue (a) that processes operating at an encoding stage do contribute to the affective priming effect, and (b) that automatic affective stimulus processing is reduced when participants selectively attend to nonaffective stimulus features.

Paul Eelen

Papers

Once in contact always in contact: Evaluative conditioning is resistant to extinction

Avoidance and Confrontation of Painful, Back-Straining Movements in Chronic Back Pain Patients

Expectancy-learning and evaluative learning in human classical conditioning: Differential effects of extinction

Expectancy-learning and evaluative learning in human classical conditioning: differential effects of extinction

Affective Primingof Nonaffective SemanticCategorizationResponses