The evaluation of agoraphobic patients' responses to a self-paced exposure programme emphasizing cognitive skills as opposed to one emphasizing relaxation training

• Main Author: Mackay, Wendy
• Other Authors: Memorial University of Newfoundland. Dept. of Psychology
• Format: Thesis
• Language: English
• Published: 1984
• Subjects: Agoraphobia > Treatment; Newfoundland studies; University of Newfoundland
• Online Access: http://collections.mun.ca/cdm/ref/collection/theses2/id/79427

Thesis (M.Sc.)--Memorial University of Newfoundland, 1985. Psychology Bibliography: leaves 130-143. Evaluation of behavioural treatments of agoraphobic clients has mainly focussed on the efficacy of the method used. Client characteristics, however, have been largely ignored in spite of the fact that it is widely acknowledged that clients show their anxiety in different ways. The present study is an attempt to match clients’ typical mode of anxiety responding with appropriate treatment. The sample included 14 agoraphobics (11 women and 3 men) who presented themselves for treatment to a Department of Psychology Teaching Clinic. The client's typical mode of responding was assessed using the Lehrer and Woolfolk Symptom Questionnaire (1982). On the basis of their scores on this questionnaire they were divided into cognitive responders and non-cognitive responders. A self-paced group treatment programme was varied to include either cognitive training or relaxation training keeping exposure and the giving of psychological explanations for agoraphobia as a constant. Half of the clients were matched for mode of responding to treatment while the other half were not. The group was run over 5 weeks, on a weekly basis, by two therapists. Only one client dropped out of the programme and the evaluation of the efficacy of matched versus not matched for mode of responding was tested at 5 weeks, 12 weeks and 6 months. The results showed that the matched group improved more than the unmatched group. However, the results were not entirely due to matching since the cognitive subjects, whether matched or unmatched, improved more than the non-cognitive subjects.