ABSTRACT
Objective
This study assessed the effectiveness of interventions intended to mitigate anticipatory traumatic reaction, a form of future-focused distress occurring in response to threat-related media reports and discussions.
Method
A stratified sample of 512 Australian adults (260 women and 252 men; mean age = 46.80, SD = 16.62) completed measures of anticipatory traumatic reaction, and positive and negative affect. Participants then viewed a stimulus video containing a series of terrorism and crime reports, and were randomly assigned to one of seven conditions. The conditions consisted of six brief online interventions, based on standard psychological treatments for anxiety and mood disorders, and one control condition.
Results
A cognitive intervention to address probability neglect (p < .001) and a mindfulness intervention (p = .036) both significantly attenuated momentary anticipatory traumatic reaction.
Conclusions
This research provides information leading to better understanding the phenomenon of anticipatory traumatic reaction and pilot results related to reducing levels of distress for affected individuals.
KEY POINTS
What is already known about this topic:
Anticipatory traumatic reaction is a form of future-focused distress that occurs in response to threat-related media and other discussions.
Anticipatory traumatic reaction includes maladaptive feelings and thoughts about reduced safety and security for self and others.
Higher levels of anticipatory traumatic reaction are associated with anxiety and depression.
What this topic adds:
Mindfulness interventions focusing on non-judgmental awareness and acceptance may reduce the effects of anticipatory traumatic reaction.
Cognitive interventions focusing on cognitive biases relating to likelihood of risk may mitigate the effects of anticipatory traumatic reaction.
It may be useful for clinicians to recognise anticipatory traumatic reaction symptoms and to integrate into their therapy strategies for helping clients deal with these symptoms.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).