Comparison of acceptance and distraction strategies in coping with experimentally induced pain

Figures & data

Figure 1 The sequence of stages in the protocol used in experiment 1. The sequence in experiment 2 was identical except that the order of presentation of the values manipulation and pre-intervention pain task stages was reversed.

Table 1 Results of a three-way mixed analysis of variance; the effect of strategy and value on shock tolerance during pre-intervention and post-intervention matching tasks in experiment 1

Source	df	F	η^2	P-value
Between subjects
Strategy	1	4.12	0.01	0.53
Value	1	0.12	0.00	0.92
Strategy × value	1	4.12	0.01	0.53
Within-group error	37	(25.77)
Within subjects
Time	1	3.12	0.08	0.09
Time × strategy	1	0.00	0.00	0.99
Time × value	1	0.11	0.00	0.75
Time × strategy × value	1	0.10	0.00	0.75
Within-group error	37	(7.90)

Note: Values enclosed in parentheses represent mean square errors.

Table 2 Results of three-way mixed analysis of variance; the effect of strategy and value on self-reported pain during pre-intervention and post-intervention matching tasks in experiment 1

Source	df	F	η^2	P-value
Between subjects
Strategy	1	2.75	0.08	0.11
Value	1	0.45	0.01	0.51
Strategy × value	1	1.66	0.05	0.21
Within-group error	34	(627.02)
Within subjects
Time	1	0.49	0.01	0.49
Time × strategy	1	30.46	0.09	0.07
Time × value	1	0.30	0.01	0.59
Time × strategy × value	1	0.01	0.00	0.94
Within-group error	34	(103.21)

Note: Values enclosed in parentheses represent mean square errors.

Table 3 Mean scores and standard deviations (in parentheses) for participants in each condition on each variable in participant rating scales 1 and 2 (usefulness and difficulty of the strategies) in experiment 1

	Participant rating scale 1		Participant rating scale 2
	Usefulness	Difficulty	Usefulness	Difficulty	Frequency
Acceptance-high value	6.60 (1.95)	4.60 (2.46)	6.50 (2.37)	4.00 (2.16)	6.00 (2.45)
Acceptance-low value	5.90 (2.03)	6.20 (1.69)	6.44 (2.51)	6.33 (2.06)	5.67 (2.60)
Control-high value	7.80 (1.81)	5.50 (3.14)	6.50 (2.99)	4.10 (3.54)	6.60 (4.60)
Control-low value	5.73 (2.61)	5.64 (3.17)	6.80 (2.78)	5.80 (2.86)	8.60 (2.12)

Table 4 Results of a two-way analysis of covariance; the effect of strategy and value on shock tolerance during pre-intervention and post-intervention matching tasks

Source	df	F	η^2	P-value
Between subjects
Strategy	1	0.802	0.02	0.38
Value	1	1.30	0.03	0.26
Strategy × value	1	0.04	0.00	0.85
Error	47	(19.73)

Note: Values enclosed in parentheses represent mean square errors.

Table 5 Results of three-way mixed analysis of variance; the effect of strategy and value on self-reported pain intensity during pre-intervention and post-intervention matching tasks in experiment 2

Source	df	F	η^2	P
Between subjects
Strategy	1	0.05	0.01	0.82
Value	1	0.23	0.01	0.63
Strategy × value	1	3.93	0.09	0.06
Within-group error	39	(822.96)
Within subjects
Time	1	0.00	0.00	0.95
Time × strategy	1	0.18	0.01	0.68
Time × value	1	0.0.05	0.00	0.83
Time × strategy × value	1	0.28	0.01	0.60
Within-group error	38	(55.92)

Note: Values enclosed in parentheses represent mean square errors.

Table 6 Mean scores and standard deviations (in parentheses) for participants in each condition on each variable in participant rating scales 1 and 2 (usefulness and difficulty of the strategies) in experiment 2

	Participant rating scale 1		Participant rating scale 2
	Usefulness	Difficulty	Usefulness	Difficulty	Frequency
Acceptance-high value	6.15 (2.48)	4.38 (2.33)	6.23 (2.24)	4.08 (2.84)	6.46 (2.54)
Acceptance-low value	5.38 (2.18)	6.38 (2.22)	4.77 (2.77)	6.85 (2.58)	4.92 (3.10)
Control-high value	6.23 (1.24)	7.46 (1.27)	6.45 (1.87)	6.91 (1.45)	7.91 (2.63)
Control-low value	6.69 (2.14)	6.31 (2.12)	6.83 (1.34)	6.08 (2.15)	7.25 (1.87)