Analogue studies on intrusion development have found that visuospatial tasks performed during the encoding of aversive information reduce subsequent intrusion development.However, these studies cannot rule out a physical explanation in terms of simple movement. In the current study we addressed this issue. Healthy participants viewed an aversive film while performing a visuospatial movement task, a configurational movement task, or no task. Intrusive images from the film were reported in a diary during the week following film viewing. In line with an information processing account of post-traumatic stress disorder, intrusion frequency was significantly reduced by the visuospatial movement task but not the configurational movement task compared to no task. This finding supports the role of visuospatial processing specifically in intrusion development.
Keywords:Intrusions, Information processing, Motion, Trauma film
Motion effects on intrusion development Page 3 of 19 Motion Effects on Intrusion DevelopmentIntrusive images can be defined as images of a traumatic event that come into mind uncontrollably. Intrusive images in post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) are mainly of a visual nature (Speckens, Ehlers, Hackmann, Ruths, & Clark, 2007), and visuospatial processing is thought to play a critical role in intrusion development. The dual representation theory (Brewin, Dalgleish, & Joseph, 1996) states that intrusion development depends on the balance between peri-traumatic visuospatial and verbalconceptual processing. During extreme stress, information processing shifts towards more visuospatial processing, resulting in image-based trauma representations that are prone to automatic intrusive activation (Holmes & Bourne, 2008).Experimental studies show that performing a visuospatial task (e.g., complex pattern tapping) during the encoding of an aversive film reduces subsequent intrusion frequency (Brewin & Saunders, 2001;Holmes, Brewin & Hennessy, 2004;Stuart, Holmes & Brewin, 2006). However, movement per se is confounded with the visuospatial aspect in these studies. Hagenaars, Van Minnen, Holmes, Brewin, and Hoogduin (2008) found that participants who were instructed not to move during an aversive film reported more intrusive images after one week compared to participants who could move freely. This gives rise to the idea that movement per se could have the reverse effect. A critical test is needed of the effects of visuospatial versus non-visuospatial movement on intrusion development.Configurational movements by definition rely on propriospatial information and not on visuospatial processing. Smyth, Pearson and Pendleton (1988) found that performing a visuospatial tapping task interfered with visuospatial recall but not with movement recall.
Motion effects on intrusion developmentPage 4 of 19Conversely, configurational movement tasks (continuously tapping body parts with the hands, hand squeezing) interfered with configurational but not visuospatial recall (Smyth et al., 1988;Smyth & Pendleton, 1989).In ...