The ‘match/mismatch’ model of fear: Empirical status and clinical implications

Marks, Melanie; Silva, Padmal de

doi:10.1016/0005-7967(94)90034-5

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Patients who estimate the likelihood of panic as high and persevere in a high expectancy rating, in spite of corrective information (the non-occurrence of panic), were expected to benefit less from treatment [Marks et al, 1994]. Thus, a negative association between overprediction bias and treatment outcome was hypothesized but was not observed.…”

Section: Overprediction Bias Expectancy and Treatment Outcomementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The match-mismatch model and panic patients' accuracy in predicting naturally occurring panic attacks

2002

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The match-mismatch model of panic states that panic disorder patients tend to overestimate the probability of panic prior to engaging in a fear-provoking situation. Furthermore, patients are expected to become more accurate in predicting panic over subsequent occasions of exposure. We tested the model with naturally occurring panic attacks. Patients rated the probability of a panic attack in the morning, and these ratings were compared to the actual occurrence of panic that day. Ratings were collected daily in a baseline period before treatment, during treatment, and again for 2 weeks after treatment. The results confirmed that panic disorder patients tend to overpredict the likelihood of panic. However, patients did not become more accurate in their predictions over time. In fact, overprediction bias increased because expectancy of panic remained stable, in spite of the decline of the frequency of panic from pre- to post-test. Thus, over a short course of therapy panic patients tend to persist in overestimating the chance that panic may occur. At baseline, expectancy of panic and the tendency to overpredict were not associated with other aspects of the symptomatology. Neither expectancy nor overprediction bias was predictive of treatment outcome. Finally, improvement in treatment was not associated with a decreased expectancy of panic.

show abstract

Section: Overprediction Bias Expectancy and Treatment Outcomementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Finally, overprediction bias may be related to the outcome of treatment for PDA. Patients who overrate the probability of a panic attack and who do so persistently, despite disconfirming evidence, may be less responsive to treatment compared to patients whose predictions become more accurate over time [Marks and de Silva, 1994].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The match-mismatch model and panic patients' accuracy in predicting naturally occurring panic attacks

2002

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Likewise, Craske et al's (2014) description of expectancy violation reaches beyond predictions of fear level to expectancies about cognitive expected outcomes (e.g., expectations of harm followed by exposure to OCD intrusive thoughts, or expectations of judgement in social anxiety). A thorough review of match-mismatch studies beyond the scope of this current study is provided by Marks and de Silva (1994).…”

Section: The Match-mismatch Theory Of Fearmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cognitive Restructuring Before Versus After Exposure: The Effect on Expectancy and Outcome in Individuals with Claustrophobia

Krause

2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

<p>Several strategies have been proposed for optimizing learning during exposure therapy. One strategy, expectancy violation, is thought to facilitate learning by maximizing the discrepancy between expected and actual outcomes of exposure. In the inhibitory learning model, Craske et al. (2014) suggest that engaging in cognitive restructuring (CR) prior to exposure will prematurely reduce expectancy (i.e., how much one believes a feared outcome will occur) and mitigate outcomes. Instead, they recommend reserving CR for after exposure to consolidate learning. To the best of my knowledge, this assumption has not been tested. The goal of this study was to examine whether CR before exposure prematurely reduces expectancy and mitigates outcomes. Participants (N = 93) endorsing all DSM-5 criteria or all DSM-5 criteria except clinically significant distress or impairment for specific phobia (enclosed places) attended an intervention bookended by pretreatment and posttreatment assessments, and a 1-month follow-up assessment. Participants were randomized to one of two interventions (1) the CR Before condition: 15 minutes of CR before exposure or (2) the CR After condition: 15 minutes of CR after exposure. A 15-minute filler task of self-report questionnaires was used as a no-treatment comparison: the CR Before condition completed the filler task after exposure and the CR After condition completed the filler task before exposure. Participants rated their expectancy (e.g., “I might suffocate,” “I might become trapped”) from 0% to 100% before and after engaging in either CR or the filler task before exposure. Next, participants engaged in six 5- minute tailored exposure trials using a claustrophobic chamber. The Claustrophobia Questionnaire (Radomsky et al., 2001), a Behavioural Approach Test, and the Claustrophobia General Cognitions Questionnaire (Febrarro & Clum, 1995) were used to measure treatment outcomes. It was hypothesized that the CR Before condition would experience greater expectancy reduction than the CR After condition before exposure, and therefore less improvement in claustrophobia outcomes at posttreatment and follow-up than the CR After condition. Results demonstrated that the CR Before condition had greater expectancy reduction than the CR After condition. However, both groups experienced similar and large significant improvement at posttreatment with gains achieved at follow-up. Implications are discussed.</p>

show abstract

Expectancies and avoidance: Towards an integrated model of chronic somatic symptoms

Nadinda,

van Laarhoven,

Van den Bergh

et al. 2024

Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ‘match/mismatch’ model of fear: Empirical status and clinical implications

Cited by 6 publications

References 53 publications

The match-mismatch model and panic patients' accuracy in predicting naturally occurring panic attacks

The match-mismatch model and panic patients' accuracy in predicting naturally occurring panic attacks

Cognitive Restructuring Before Versus After Exposure: The Effect on Expectancy and Outcome in Individuals with Claustrophobia

Expectancies and avoidance: Towards an integrated model of chronic somatic symptoms

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About