دانلود مقاله ISI انگلیسی شماره 34676
عنوان فارسی مقاله

فراشناخت، استرس درک شده و احساسات منفی

کد مقاله سال انتشار مقاله انگلیسی ترجمه فارسی تعداد کلمات
34676 2008 10 صفحه PDF سفارش دهید محاسبه نشده
خرید مقاله
پس از پرداخت، فوراً می توانید مقاله را دانلود فرمایید.
عنوان انگلیسی
Metacognition, perceived stress, and negative emotion
منبع

Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)

Journal : Personality and Individual Differences, Volume 44, Issue 5, April 2008, Pages 1172–1181

کلمات کلیدی
فراشناخت - احساسات منفی - استرس درک شده -
پیش نمایش مقاله
پیش نمایش مقاله فراشناخت، استرس درک شده و احساسات منفی

چکیده انگلیسی

The present study explored the relationships between metacognition, perceived stress and negative emotion. A convenience sample of 420 participants completed the following questionnaires: metacognitions questionnaire 30 (MCQ-30), perceived stress scale (PSS), and hospital anxiety and depression scale (HADS). A cross-sectional design was adopted and data analysis consisted of correlation and structural equation modeling analyses. Metacognition was found to be positively and significantly correlated with both perceived stress and negative emotion (anxiety and depression). Positive and significant correlations were also observed between perceived stress, anxiety and depression. Structural equation modeling was used to test a moderation model in which metacognition moderates the relationship between perceived stress and negative emotion. The results supported this hypothesis. These preliminary results would seem to suggest that individual differences in metacognition are relevant to understanding the link between perceived stress and negative emotion.

مقدمه انگلیسی

According to Lazarus (Lazarus, 1999 and Lazarus and Folkman, 1984) the stress process is initiated with the construal of an event as an imposition. Individuals appraise events differently making some more susceptible to negative stress outcomes (Vollrath & Torgersen, 2000). Stressor appraisals result in threat escalation when individuals believe they have inadequate resources to meet or challenge external demands (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). Cognitive appraisal is a key variable in stress reactions (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). It involves two processes: primary and secondary appraisal. Primary appraisal refers to an individual’s evaluation of the significance of an event as stressful, positive, controllable, challenging or irrelevant (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). Secondary appraisal refers to the individual’s evaluation of his or her own resources and options for coping with the stressful situation. Coping refers to the cognitive and behavioural strategies employed to manage a problematic person–environment relationship (Folkman & Lazarus, 1985). Actual coping efforts aimed at regulating the relationship give rise to outcomes of the coping process. Outcomes of maladaptive coping may include experiencing symptoms of both anxiety and depression (Garnefski and Kraaij, 2006, Garnefski et al., 2003 and Garnefski et al., 2002). Perceived stress can be conceptualized as the degree to which a situation in one’s life is appraised as stressful (Cohen, Kamarck, & Mermelstein, 1983) and therefore as an outcome of primary and secondary appraisals (Lazarus, 1999). In other words, perceived stress is a state outcome reflecting the global evaluation of the significance and difficulty in dealing with personal and environmental challenges. Research evidence indicates that perceived stress is associated to both anxiety and depression (e.g., Bergdahl and Bergdahl, 2002, Chang, 1998 and Van Eck and Nicolson, 1994). No published research, to date, has examined the possible role of individual differences in metacognition in moderating the relationship between perceived stress and negative emotion. Metacognition can be defined as “stable knowledge or beliefs about one’s own cognitive system, and knowledge about factors that affect the functioning of the system; the regulation and awareness of the current state of cognition, and appraisal of the significance of thought and memories” (p. 302; Wells, 1995). Brown (1987) distinguishes between two typologies of metacognition: (1) knowledge about cognition – that which is knowable and reportable; and (2) the regulation of cognition – the planning, evaluating, monitoring and regulation of activities that affect cognitive processes. In the area of adult psychopathology the study of these types of metacognitive processes is mainly associated with the self-regulatory executive function (S-REF; Wells and Matthews, 1994 and Wells and Matthews, 1996) theory. This theory offers a detailed conceptualization of how multiple metacognitive factors are involved in development and persistence of psychological disorders. According to the S-REF (Wells and Matthews, 1994 and Wells and Matthews, 1996) theory metacognitive knowledge (metacognitions) predisposes individuals to develop response patterns to thoughts and internal events that are characterised by heightened self-focused attention, recyclical thinking patterns, avoidance and thought suppression, and threat monitoring. In other words, metacognitions are believed to play a fundamental role in influencing the choice of maladaptive coping strategies. The role of metacognitions in psychopathology has been explored using the metacognitions questionnaire (Cartwright-Hatton and Wells, 1997 and Wells and Cartwright-Hatton, 2004). The questionnaire consists of five distinct factors: (1) positive beliefs about worry, which measures the extent to which a person believes that perseverative thinking is useful; (2) negative beliefs about worry concerning uncontrollability and danger, which assesses the extent to which a person thinks that perseverative thinking is uncontrollable and dangerous; (3) cognitive confidence, which assesses confidence in attention and memory; (4) beliefs about the need to control thoughts, which assesses the extent to which a person believes that certain types of thoughts need to be suppressed; and (5) cognitive self-consciousness, which measures the tendency to monitor one’s own thoughts and focus attention inwards. Support for the link between individual dimensions of metacognition and psychopathology has come from a wide range of studies showing cross-sectional and causal relationships between metacognitive factors and psychological disturbances including: depression (Papageorgiou & Wells, 2003), generalized anxiety disorder (Cartwright-Hatton and Wells, 1997 and Wells and Carter, 2001), hypochondriasis (Bouman & Meijer, 1999), obsessive–compulsive disorder (Wells & Papageorgiou, 1998), post-traumatic stress disorder (Holeva et al., 2001 and Roussis and Wells, 2006), problem drinking (Spada and Wells, 2005, Spada and Wells, 2006, Spada et al., 2007 and Spada et al., 2007), procrastination (Spada, Hiou, & Nikčević, 2006), psychosis (Morrison, Wells, & Nothard, 2000), smoking dependence (Spada, Nikčević, Moneta, & Wells, 2007) and test anxiety (Matthews et al., 1999 and Spada et al., 2006). From the S-REF (Wells and Matthews, 1994 and Wells and Matthews, 1996) theory it emerges that dimensions of metacognition are a generic factor in vulnerability to psychopathology. Metacognitions should therefore: (1) be associated with perceived stress; and (2) contribute to the relationship between perceived stress and negative emotion because in the S-REF theory (Wells and Matthews, 1994 and Wells and Matthews, 1996) perceived stress can be conceptualised as a state outcome modulated by trait metacognitive knowledge. Trait metacognitive knowledge guides the interpretation of the significance of internal states, such as perceived stress, and the choice and implementation of maladaptive patterns of coping that typically lead to greater accessibility of threat concepts in processing and consequently an escalation of negative emotion. Three facets of metacognition have been found to be consistently implicated in psychological dysfunction across a variety of domains: negative beliefs about worry concerning uncontrollability and danger, cognitive confidence, and beliefs about the need to control thoughts. These same dimensions are likely to play a crucial role in the perceived stress–negative emotion relationship. Specifically, negative beliefs about worry concerning uncontrollability and danger, and beliefs about the need to control thoughts, are likely to contribute to persistent and negative interpretations of experience such that perceived stress leads to more intense negative emotional outcomes. Similarly, cognitive confidence (i.e., poor memory confidence) is also likely to transmit the effects of perceived stress by possibly limiting the choice of effective coping strategies. The present study sought to examine the three metacognitive factors that are thought to be relevant in the relationship between perceived stress and negative emotion by testing a moderation model in which perceived stress interacts with metacognition in predicting negative emotion. Because variables in the model were expected to be highly correlated, a moderation test was performed using structural equation modeling.

خرید مقاله
پس از پرداخت، فوراً می توانید مقاله را دانلود فرمایید.