Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorWalker, S. P.
dc.contributor.advisorEsterhuyse, K. G. F.
dc.contributor.authorPretorius, Chrisma
dc.date.accessioned2016-01-08T10:12:17Z
dc.date.available2016-01-08T10:12:17Z
dc.date.copyright2010-11-30
dc.date.issued2012-10-19
dc.date.submitted2010-11-30
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11660/2078
dc.description.abstractEnglish: Research interest in worry has increased over the past three decades. Theory development, laboratory studies and clinical experience have resulted in the formulation of a number of theories and models related to the development and maintenance of excessive worry and generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). The available cognitive behavioural literature on worry seems to place particular emphasis on three models of worry. The avoidance model of worry (AMW) and GAD (Borkovec, Ray & Stöber, 1998), the metacognitive model (MCM) of GAD (Wells, 1995) and the intolerance of uncertainty model (IUM) (Dugas, Gagnon, Ladouceur & Freeston, 1998) have all enjoyed significant empirical attention and have all formed the basis for specific cognitive-behavioural interventions for worry and GAD. However, to date, no attempt appears to have been made to compare these models to one another or to determine the applicability of these particular models of worry to a multi-ethnic context. Therefore, the current study aimed to determine the applicability of these three cognitive models of worry to the understanding of worry in a non-clinical multi-ethnic sample. To this end, a convenience sample of 1224 university students (87.7% undergraduate) was drawn. Ethnicity was equally distributed in the sample (49.9% black and 50.1% Caucasian). However, the majority (709) of the participants were female. Participants were also assigned to one of three groups (low worry: n = 1105; high-worry non-GAD: n = 49; high-worry GAD: n = 70) based on their worry intensity and GAD self-report diagnoses. Moderated hierarchical regression analyses revealed that gender and worry/GAD status moderated the relationship between the cognitive processes hypothesised to underpin the development and maintenance of worry and worry intensity across all three models of worry, as well as in a model comprised of the cognitive processes relevant to all three individual cognitive models. However, ethnicity was found not to moderate these relationships. Furthermore, hierarchical regression analyses indicated that the three cognitive models of worry, individually and in combination, accounted for a significant proportion of the variance in the worry intensity of the current sample. This finding was evident across gender and worry/GAD status. Thus, the AMW, MCM and IUM, as well as a combination of the three models, appear to be applicable to the understanding of non-clinical worry in the multi-ethnic South African context. Furthermore, when the AWM, MCM and IUM were compared to the combined model of worry, only the AWM was found to account for a significantly lower proportion of the variance in the worry intensity of the sample than the combined model did. Consequently, although all three models appear to be applicable to the understanding of nonclinical worry in the multi-ethnic context, using a combined model to explain worry intensity appears superior only to the AWM. With regard to the interaction between specific cognitive processes and worry intensity, only positive beliefs about worry were found to account consistently for a significant proportion of the worry intensity reported by the low-worry, female and male participants. Furthermore, positive beliefs about worry were not found to account for a significant proportion of the variance in the worry intensity of the high-worry participants. Gender-specific trends were evident with respect to positive beliefs about worry in relation to the non-clinical worry reported by the participants, with females generally viewing worry as a source of motivation and men perceiving worry to be a positive personality trait. The current findings also suggest a significant relationship between negative problem orientation and worry intensity among high-worry GAD individuals. Contrary to most of the existing literature, the current study suggests that negative beliefs about worry, intolerance of uncertainty, negative problem orientation and cognitive avoidance do not significantly contribute to the worry experienced by non-clinical individuals. In addition, negative beliefs about worry, intolerance of uncertainty and cognitive avoidance were not found to contribute significantly to the worry experienced by excessive worriers, irrespective of their self-report GAD diagnostic status. The current study raises a number of questions regarding the applicability of the three cognitive models of worry and their specific components to the understanding of worry, particularly excessive worry, in the multiethnic South African context. Nonetheless, this study has succeeded in exploring the contribution of cognitive processes to the experience of worry in a specific multi-ethnic context by investigating the applicability of theoretical cognitive models of worry in this context. Furthermore, this study has provided a starting point from which a clearer understanding of the role of cognitive processes in worry can be achieved in the South African context.en_ZA
dc.description.abstractAfrikaans: Navorsers se belangstelling in bekommernis het oor die laaste drie dekades toegeneem. Teorie-ontwikkeling, laboratoriumstudies en kliniese ervaring het gelei tot die formulering van 'n aantal teorieë en modelle oor die ontwikkeling en instandhouding van oormatige bekommernis en veralgemeende angsversteuring (VAV). Dit blyk dat beskikbare literatuur oor kognitiewe gedrag oor bekommernis spesifieke klem plaas op drie modelle van bekommernis. Die vermydingsmodel van bekommernis (VMB) en VAV (Borkovec, Ray & Stöber, 1998), die metakognitiewe model (MKM) van VAV (Wells, 1995) en die intoleransie-vir-onsekerheid-model (IOM) (Dugas, Gagnon, Ladouceur & Freeston, 1998) het almal betekenisvolle empiriese aandag geniet en het almal die basis van spesifieke kognitiewe gedragsintervensies vir bekommernis en VAV gevorm. Dit blyk egter dat geen poging tot op datum aangewend is om hierdie modelle met mekaar te vergelyk of om die toepaslikheid van hierdie spesifieke modelle van bekommernis in 'n multi-etniese konteks te bepaal nie. Die huidige studie se doel was dus om die toepaslikheid van hierdie drie kognitiewe modelle van bekommernis tot die verstaan van bekommernis in 'n nie-kliniese multi-etniese steekproef te bepaal. Vir hierdie doel is 'n gerieflikheidsteekproef van 1224 universiteitstudente (87.7% voorgraads) getrek. Etnisiteit was gelykop in die steekproef versprei (49.9% swart en 50.1% blank). Die meerderheid van die deelnemers (709) was egter vroulik. Deelnemers is ook op grond van die intensiteit van hulle bekommernis en self- gerapporteerde VAV-diagnose in een van drie groepe (lae bekommernis, n = 1105; hoë bekommernis nie-VAV, n = 49; hoë bekommernis VAV, n = 70) ingedeel. Gemodereerde hiërargiese regressie-analises het aangedui dat geslag en bekommernis/VAV- status die verhouding tussen die kognitiewe prosesse wat gehipotetiseer word om die ontwikkeling en instandhouding van bekommernis te ondersteun en die intensiteit van bekommernis oor al drie modelle van bekommernis, asook in 'n model wat bestaan uit die kognitiewe prosesse wat relevant is tot al drie individuele kognitiewe modelle, modereer. Dit is egter bevind dat etnisiteit nie hierdie verhoudings modereer nie. Hiërargiese regressie- analises het verder aangedui dat die drie kognitiewe modelle van bekommernis, individueel en in kombinasie, 'n beduidende proporsie van die variansie in die intensiteit van bekommernis van die huidige steekproef verklaar. Hierdie bevinding was duidelik oor geslag en bekommernis/VAV-status heen. Dit blyk dus dat die VMB, MKM en IOM, asook 'n kombinasie van die drie modelle, toepaslik is om nie-kliniese bekommernis in die multi- etniese Suid-Afrikaanse konteks te begryp. Verder, as die VMB, MKM en IOM met die gekombineerde model van bekommernis vergelyk word, is bevind dat slegs die VMB 'n betekenisvolle laer proporsie van die variansie in die intensiteit van bekommernis as die gekombineerde model verklaar. Die gevolg hiervan is dat, alhoewel dit blyk dat al drie modelle op nie-kliniese bekommernis in die multi-etniese konteks toepaslik is, die gebruik van 'n gekombineerde model om die intensiteit van bekommernis te verduidelik, slegs beter as die VMB blyk te wees. Met betrekking tot die interaksie tussen spesifieke kognitiewe prosesse en die intensiteit van bekommernis, is bevind dat slegs positiewe oortuigings oor bekommernis konsekwent 'n betekenisvolle proporsie van die intensiteit van bekommernis gerapporteer deur die vroulike en manlike deelnemers met lae bekommernis verklaar. Verder het positiewe oortuigings oor bekommernis nie 'n betekenisvolle proporsie van die variansie in die intensiteit van bekommernis van die deelnemers met hoë bekommernis verklaar nie. Geslag-spesifieke patrone was duidelik met betrekking tot positiewe oortuigings oor bekommernis in verband met die nie-kliniese bekommernis wat deur die deelnemers gerapporteer is, met vroue wat bekommernis in die algemeen as 'n bron van motivering beskou en mans wat bekommernis as 'n positiewe persoonlikheidstrek beskou. Die huidige bevindinge stel ook 'n betekenisvolle verhouding tussen negatiewe probleemoriëntasie en die intensiteit van bekommernis onder VAV-individue met hoë bekommernis voor. In teenstelling met die meeste van die bestaande literatuur, stel die huidige studie voor dat negatiewe oortuigings oor bekommernis, intoleransie van onsekerheid, negatiewe probleem- oriëntasie en kognitiewe vermyding nie 'n betekenisvolle bydrae lewer tot die bekommernis wat deur nie-kliniese individue ervaar word nie. Verder is ook bevind dat negatiewe oortuigings oor bekommernis, intoleransie van onsekerheid en kognitiewe vermyding nie 'n betekenisvolle bydra gelewer het tot die bekommernis wat ervaar word deur individue wat hulle oormatig bekommer nie, afgesien van hulle diagnostiese VAV-status. Die huidige studie lig 'n aantal vrae met betrekking tot die toepaslikheid van die drie kognitiewe modelle van bekommernis en hulle spesifieke komponente tot die verstaan van bekommernis, spesifiek oormatige bekommernis, binne die multi-etniese Suid-Afrikaanse konteks uit. Hierdie studie het nietemin daarin geslaag om die bydrae van kognitiewe prosesse tot die ervaring van bekommernis in 'n spesifieke multi-etniese konteks te verken deur die toepaslikheid van teoretiese kognitiewe modelle van bekommernis in hierdie konteks te ondersoek. Hierdie studie het verder 'n beginpunt voorsien vanwaar duideliker begrip van die rol van kognitiewe prosesse in bekommernis in die Suid-Afrikaanse konteks bereik kan word.af
dc.language.isoenen_ZA
dc.publisherUniversity of the Free Stateen_ZA
dc.subjectThesis (Ph.D. (Psychology))--University of the Free State, 2010en_ZA
dc.subjectAnxiety -- Cross cultural studiesen_ZA
dc.subjectAnxiety disordersen_ZA
dc.subjectWorryen_ZA
dc.subjectGeneralized anxiety disorder (GAD)en_ZA
dc.subjectNegative problem orientationen_ZA
dc.subjectMetacognitive model of GADen_ZA
dc.subjectIntolerance of uncertainty modelen_ZA
dc.subjectAvoidance model of worry and GADen_ZA
dc.titleCognitive process in excessive worry : a cross cultural investigation of three theoriesen_ZA
dc.typeThesisen_ZA
dc.rights.holderUniversity of the Free Stateen_ZA


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record