حل مسئله اجتماعی و اضطراب خصلتی بعنوان پیش بینی کننده نگرانی در یک جمعیت دانشجویی
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|33334||2002||12 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||محاسبه نشده|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Personality and Individual Differences, Volume 33, Issue 4, September 2002, Pages 573–585
This study examined the relations between trait anxiety, social problem-solving ability, and two different measures of worry in a sample of 353 college students. The worry measures were the Penn State Worry Questionnaire (PSWQ), which measures worry frequency, uncontrollability, and distress, and the Catastrophic Worry Questionnaire (CWQ), which assesses extreme negative outcome expectancies associated with worry. Results of hierarchical multiple regression analyses showed that social problem-solving ability accounted for a significant amount of variance in both worry measures even after trait anxiety was controlled. Three different dimensions of social problem-solving ability were found to be significantly associated with worry. Negative problem orientation was positively related to both worry measures after controlling for trait anxiety. In addition, rational problem solving and impulsivity/carelessness style were both positively related to the CWQ after controlling for trait anxiety and problem orientation, which suggests that catastrophic worry has both constructive and dysfunctional problem-solving aspects that cannot be accounted for by the person's problem orientation. The implications of these findings for theory, research, and practice were discussed.
In recent years, researchers and practitioners in psychology have begun to pay increasing attention to the construct of worry. In its more benign form, worrying appears to be a relatively common and possibly universal human experience that may even have some adaptive value (Davey, 1994a). However, when worry becomes excessive and difficult to control, it can be very disturbing, self-defeating, and maladaptive. In fact, excessive and uncontrollable worry has been identified as the central feature of Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD) in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders—Fourth Edition (DSM-IV, American Psychiatric Association, 1994). Hence, worry is now recognized as a significant psychological phenomenon worthy of serious empirical investigation into its nature and causes. Based on the views of several investigators that worry often represents defective or dysfunctional attempts to solve problems (Borkovec, 1985, Borkovec et al., 1983, Breznitz, 1971, Davey, 1994a, Stöber et al., 2000 and Tallis et al., 1994), a number of recent studies have examined a possible link between social problem-solving processes and worry. The term social problem solving refers to problem solving as it occurs in the natural environment (D'Zurilla & Nezu, 1982). Most of the research on the relations between social problem- solving variables and worry has been based on the model of social problem solving originally developed by D'Zurilla and Goldfried (1971) and later refined and expanded by D'Zurilla & Nezu, 1982 and D'Zurilla & Nezu, 1999. According to this model, problem-solving outcomes in the real world are largely determined by two major, partially independent processes: (1) problem orientation and (2) problem-solving proper. Problem orientation is a metacognitive process involving the operation of a set of relatively stable cognitive-emotional schemas that describe how a person generally thinks and feels about problems in living, as well as his or her own problem-solving ability. Depending on its nature (positive vs. negative), a person's problem orientation may either facilitate or inhibit problem-solving performance. Problem-solving proper is the core process in social problem solving, namely, the search for a solution through the application of problem-solving skills. Numerous studies have demonstrated that problem orientation and problem-solving skills are both important for effective real-life problem solving and adjustment (see review by D'Zurilla & Nezu, 1999). Several studies have examined the relations between these two major components of social problem-solving ability and the experience of worry. In general, the findings have consistently demonstrated that problem orientation, but not problem-solving skills, is significantly related to worry in college students (Davey, 1994b, Davey et al., 1992, Davey et al., 1996, Dugas et al., 1995 and Dugas et al., 1997). Specifically, lower problem orientation scores are associated with higher levels of worry. In addition, other studies using clinical samples have found that GAD patients, whose worry is excessive and uncontrollable, have greater deficits in problem orientation (but not problem-solving skills) than other anxiety disorder patients and nonclinical controls (Dugas et al., 1998, Ladouceur et al., 1998 and Ladouceur et al., 1999). Accordingly, Ladouceur et al. (1999) have concluded that poor problem orientation is a broadly specific GAD process variable not shared by other anxiety disorders. The present study attempted to extend or improve upon the previous research in three important ways. First, we used a new multi-dimensional measure of social problem-solving ability, namely, the Social Problem-Solving Inventory-Revised (SPSI-R; D'Zurilla, Nezu, & Maydeu-Olivares, 2001), which assesses dimensions of social problem-solving ability that have not yet been examined. Most of the previous studies in this area used the original theory-driven Social Problem-Solving Inventory (SPSI; D'Zurilla & Nezu, 1990), which consists of two major scales that were designed to measure problem orientation and problem-solving proper, defined as the knowledge and use of effective problem-solving skills. However, recent factor-analytic studies (Maydeu-Olivares & D'Zurilla, 1995 and Maydeu-Olivares & D'Zurilla, 1996) have found that the SPSI is actually measuring two different problem orientation dimensions (positive problem orientation and negative problem orientation) and three different problem-solving proper dimensions (rational problem solving, impulsivity/carelessness style, and avoidance style). Based on these findings, positive and negative problem orientation are now conceived as two partially independent dimensions rather than opposite poles on a single dimension. Rational problem solving is a constructive dimension that refers to the knowledge and systematic application of effective problem-solving skills (viz. problem definition and formulation, generation of alternative solutions, decision making, & solution implementation and verification). Impulsivity/carelessness style is a dysfunctional dimension characterized by impulsive, careless, hurried, and incomplete attempts to apply problem-solving skills, whereas avoidance style is another defective dimension that includes the tendencies to put off problem solving, wait for problems to resolve themselves, and shift the responsibility for problem solving to others. The second way that we attempted to extend previous research was to add a new measure of worry, the Catastrophic Worry Questionnaire (CWQ), which we developed for this study. Most previous studies have focused on the Penn State Worry Questionnaire (PSWQ; Meyer, Miller, Metzger, & Borkovec, 1990). An inspection of the items in this questionnaire reveals that it is measuring worry frequency, uncontrollability, and distress. In addition to these dimensions, worry may also be measured in terms of the magnitude of negative outcome expectancies associated with worry (i.e. “catastrophic” expectancies). This dimension of worry is the focus of treatment in major cognitive-behavioral therapies for anxiety disorders (Beck & Emery, 1985 and Ellis & Dryden, 1997). Hence, we developed the CWQ to measure this dimension and included it in this study along with the PSWQ. The third way that we attempted to improve upon the previous research was to control for the personality variable of trait anxiety, which has been found to be strongly related to both worry and problem orientation (Davey et al., 1992, D'Zurilla et al., 2001, Kant et al., 1997 and Meyer et al., 1990). Because of this finding, it was deemed important to show that any relationship found between problem orientation and worry is not completely redundant with the relation between trait anxiety and worry. In one earlier study, Davey et al. (1992) found significant correlations between two problem orientation measures derived from the Problem-Solving Inventory (PSI; Heppner & Petersen, 1982), namely, problem-solving confidence and personal control, and a measure of worry frequency in college students. However, after trait anxiety was partialed out, the correlations were no longer significant. On the other hand, using multiple regression analyses, Dugas et al., 1995 and Dugas et al., 1997 found that problem orientation measured by the SPSI significantly predicted worry even after controlling for anxiety level. However, the measure of anxiety in these studies was the Beck Anxiety Inventory (Beck, Epstein, Brown, & Steer, 1988), which measures current anxiety symptoms (i.e. over the past 7 days). Because we were interested in a more trait-like measure, the Trait Anxiety scale of the State/Trait Anxiety Inventory ( Spielberger, 1983) was used in this study, which is also generally viewed as a measure of neuroticism or negative affectivity. Based on theory and previous research in this area, the present study had two major hypotheses. First, we predicted that the set of problem orientation dimensions measured by the SPSI-R (viz. positive problem orientation and negative problem orientation) would account for a significant amount of variance in worry above and beyond what is accounted for by trait anxiety. In addition, we also expected to find that negative orientation would be the stonger predictor within this set. Second, we predicted that the set of problem-solving proper dimensions measured by the SPSI-R (viz. rational problem solving, impulsivity/carelessness style, and avoidance style) would contribute significant incremental validity to the prediction of worry beyond what is accounted for by problem orientation alone. More specifically, we expected to find that impulsivity/carelessness style and avoidance style, but not rational problem solving, would be significant predictors within this set. Our prediction is based on the assumption that these two dimensions are representative of the type of thwarted or dysfunctional problem solving that worry theorists have hypothesized to be associated with worrying (e.g. Borkovec, 1985, Breznitz, 1971 and Davey, 1994a). Consistent with this view, a recent experimental study by Stöber et al. (2000) found that worrying was associated with less concreteness when attempting to define problems. This performance deficiency could be reflecting the impulsive/careless and/or avoidant problem-solving styles measured by the SPSI-R.