![]() The authors argued that anxious cognitive content’s poor performance in demonstrating specificity might be due to the possibility that (i) anxious cognitive content might not be specific to anxiety and (ii) the themes involved in anxious cognitive content might be shared variables between depression and anxiety. Another way of differentiating depressive and anxious cognitive content was proposed to be associated with the temporal focus of cognitions, where depressive cognitions were more likely to be past-oriented, and anxious cognitions future-oriented ( 29).Ī meta-analysis on the cognitive content specificity hypothesis concluded that the hypothesis was only supported for depressive cognitive content ( 15). This suggestion stemmed from clinical observations demonstrating that depressive cognitive content was focused on themes related to negative self-evaluation, hopelessness, and pessimism about the future ( 9, 26, 27), whereas anxious cognitive content was more focused on physical or psychological threat, and an inability to cope with danger ( 26, 28). Researchers focusing on cognitive content specificity have suggested that instruments like the CCL might be an alternative to make a diagnostic distinction between depression and anxiety. After the development of an assessment tool to discriminate between depressive and anxious cognitions, i.e., the cognition checklist (CCL) ( 10), research aiming to improve the differential diagnosis of mood and anxiety disorders has increased substantially ( 12, 15, 17- 25). Although other theories have attempted to explain the cognitive content specificity, e.g., the self-discrepancy theory by Higgins ( 16), the most investigated formulation to date has been the hypothesis by Beck ( 9). Yet, now the term is more widely accepted as “a more specific claim that certain themes of semantic content in self-reported automatic thoughts are unique to either depression or anxiety” ( 15). This relationship between cognition and emotion, therefore, is thought to form the background of the cognitive content specificity hypothesis.īefore cognitive variables were described in a taxonomy by Kendall and Ingram ( 14), there was confusion about the use of the term cognitive content specificity. Depending on their content and meaning, NATs are associated with specific emotions, and since they are usually quite brief, patients are often more aware of the emotions they feel ( 13). NATs distort reality, are emotionally distressing, and interfere with patients’ functionality. NATs are the most easily accessible cognitions, and they tend to be the easiest to work on with patients during therapy sessions. This theory proposes a three-layer cognitive structure, where NATs are topographically located on the outermost surface. According to the cognitive content specificity hypothesis, automatic thoughts and subjectively perceived emotional states should be positively related ( 10- 12).īeck’s theory of emotional disorder suggests that negative automatic thoughts (NATs) and the underlying schemata affect one’s way of interpreting situations and result in maladaptive coping strategies ( 1, 13). Beck’s cognitive theory posits that mood states may be discriminated on the basis of their unique cognitive contents ( 1, 9). ![]() Hypotheses about the relationship between cognition and emotion that were derived from this theory have led to a greater understanding of many psychopathological states, and to an effective treatment modality, i.e., cognitive behavioral therapy, which has impressively shaped the psychiatry literature ever since ( 5- 8). ![]() The cognitive theory of emotional disorders developed by Beck ( 1) has been enormously influential in psychiatry ( 2- 4). ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |