Volume 10 -
MEJDS (2020) 10: 50 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Ashori M, Najafi F. Cognitive Emotion Regulation Training on Cognitive Flexibility and Alexithymia in Hearing-Impaired Students. MEJDS 2020; 10 :50-50
URL: http://jdisabilstud.org/article-1-1310-en.html
URL: http://jdisabilstud.org/article-1-1310-en.html
1- Department of Psychology and Education of Children with Special Needs, Faculty of Education and Psychology, University of Isfahan
Abstract: (2286 Views)
Background & Objectives: Deafness is a common sensorineural impairment, leading to decreased life quality, withdrawal, reduced social activities, and feelings of rejection. These problems may consequently decrease the rate of cognitive flexibility and emotion regulation in hearing–impaired children and adolescents. It might even sometimes generate alexithymia in them. Planning appropriate training programs to improve cognitive flexibility and emotion regulation in hearing–impaired children and adolescents is of importance. The cognitive emotion regulation training program is one of these approaches. This program significantly addresses cognitive flexibility and emotion regulation. In addition, the cognitive emotion regulation training programs could increase cognitive flexibility and decrease alexithymia in students with hearing impairments. Hearing–impaired children and adolescents face many challenges with cognitive flexibility and emotional reactions. Inappropriate emotional reactions lead to cognitive problems and alexithymia in hearing–impaired children and adolescents. Therefore, the present study aimed to determine the effectiveness of cognitive emotion regulation training program on cognitive flexibility and alexithymia in hearing–impaired students.
Methods: This was a quasi–experimental study with a pretest–posttest and a control group design. The study participants were 24 hearing–impaired students aged 15–19 years. They were selected by the convenience sampling method from the hearing–impaired school of Shaghaygh in Yasoj City, Iran, in the 2017–2018 academic year. They were from a middle socioeconomic class. The study participants were randomly divided into the experimental and control groups, each group consisting of 12 students. The experimental group participated in an 8–session cognitive emotion regulation training program (two 50–minute sessions weekly); however, the control group received no intervention and remained in the relevant waiting list. Denis and Vendoral Cognitive Flexibility Scale (CFS) (2010) and the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS) (Bagby, Parker, & Taylor, 1994) were used for assessing the study participants. The CFS and TAS were completed by hearing–impaired students at pretest and posttest phases (i.e., before and after the training sessions). The obtained data were analyzed using Multivariate Analysis of Covariance (MANCOVA) in SPSS at α=0.05.
Results: Initially, the normality of variables and contingency of variance and covariance assumptions were tested. The Kolmogorov–Smirnov test results suggested that all variables were normally distributed. Besides, Box's M test confirmed the contingency of variance–covariance assumption. Thus, the assumptions of MANCOVA were confirmed, and this test could be used for data analysis. The MANCOVA results indicated that the experimental and control groups significantly differed in cognitive flexibility and alexithymia variables at the posttest stage (p<0.001). The MANCOVA data also suggested that the cognitive emotion regulation training program significantly affected cognitive flexibility and alexithymia in hearing–impaired students (p<0.001). In other words, the cognitive emotion regulation training program increased cognitive flexibility and decreased alexithymia scores in hearing–impaired students. According to Eta squared measures, 54% and 61% of the variations of the cognitive flexibility and alexithymia variables could be respectively explained by the study subjects’ participation in the cognitive emotion regulation training program. Furthermore, the cognitive emotion regulation training program significantly affected all subscales of alexithymia (difficulty in identifying feelings, difficulty in describing emotions, & objective thinking) in these students (p<0.001). According to Eta squared values, 56%, 62%, and 55% of variations in difficulty in identifying feelings, difficulty in describing emotions, and objective thinking be respectively explained by the study subjects’ participation in cognitive emotion regulation training program.
Conclusion: The cognitive emotion regulation training program improved the cognitive flexibility and alexithymia and its subscales (difficulty in identifying feelings, difficulty in describing emotions, & objective thinking) among the hearing–impaired students. In other words, applying this training program has been associated with effective and positive outcomes. Cognitive flexibility and alexithymia of the control group that did not participate in the cognitive emotion regulation training program did not improve significantly. Therefore, paying attention to the cognitive emotion regulation training program is essential. Accordingly, planning for providing training this program to hearing–impaired children and students is of particular importance.
Methods: This was a quasi–experimental study with a pretest–posttest and a control group design. The study participants were 24 hearing–impaired students aged 15–19 years. They were selected by the convenience sampling method from the hearing–impaired school of Shaghaygh in Yasoj City, Iran, in the 2017–2018 academic year. They were from a middle socioeconomic class. The study participants were randomly divided into the experimental and control groups, each group consisting of 12 students. The experimental group participated in an 8–session cognitive emotion regulation training program (two 50–minute sessions weekly); however, the control group received no intervention and remained in the relevant waiting list. Denis and Vendoral Cognitive Flexibility Scale (CFS) (2010) and the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS) (Bagby, Parker, & Taylor, 1994) were used for assessing the study participants. The CFS and TAS were completed by hearing–impaired students at pretest and posttest phases (i.e., before and after the training sessions). The obtained data were analyzed using Multivariate Analysis of Covariance (MANCOVA) in SPSS at α=0.05.
Results: Initially, the normality of variables and contingency of variance and covariance assumptions were tested. The Kolmogorov–Smirnov test results suggested that all variables were normally distributed. Besides, Box's M test confirmed the contingency of variance–covariance assumption. Thus, the assumptions of MANCOVA were confirmed, and this test could be used for data analysis. The MANCOVA results indicated that the experimental and control groups significantly differed in cognitive flexibility and alexithymia variables at the posttest stage (p<0.001). The MANCOVA data also suggested that the cognitive emotion regulation training program significantly affected cognitive flexibility and alexithymia in hearing–impaired students (p<0.001). In other words, the cognitive emotion regulation training program increased cognitive flexibility and decreased alexithymia scores in hearing–impaired students. According to Eta squared measures, 54% and 61% of the variations of the cognitive flexibility and alexithymia variables could be respectively explained by the study subjects’ participation in the cognitive emotion regulation training program. Furthermore, the cognitive emotion regulation training program significantly affected all subscales of alexithymia (difficulty in identifying feelings, difficulty in describing emotions, & objective thinking) in these students (p<0.001). According to Eta squared values, 56%, 62%, and 55% of variations in difficulty in identifying feelings, difficulty in describing emotions, and objective thinking be respectively explained by the study subjects’ participation in cognitive emotion regulation training program.
Conclusion: The cognitive emotion regulation training program improved the cognitive flexibility and alexithymia and its subscales (difficulty in identifying feelings, difficulty in describing emotions, & objective thinking) among the hearing–impaired students. In other words, applying this training program has been associated with effective and positive outcomes. Cognitive flexibility and alexithymia of the control group that did not participate in the cognitive emotion regulation training program did not improve significantly. Therefore, paying attention to the cognitive emotion regulation training program is essential. Accordingly, planning for providing training this program to hearing–impaired children and students is of particular importance.
Type of Study: Original Research Article |
Subject:
Rehabilitation
References
1. Ashori M, Ghasemzadeh S. The effectiveness of mental immunization training on alexithymia, self-determination and life orientation of adolescents with hearing impairment. Journal of Psychological Studies. 2018;14(2):7–23. [Persian] [DOI]
2. Zaidman-Zait A, Most T, Tarrasch R, Haddad-eid E, Brand D. The impact of childhood hearing loss on the family: Mothers’ and fathers’ stress and coping resources. J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ. 2016;21(1):23–33. [DOI]
3. Hallahan DP, Kauffman JM, Pullen PC. Exceptional learners: an introduction to special education. Fourteenth edition. New York: Pearson; 2018.
4. Miron LR, Sherrill AM, Orcutt HK. Fear of self-compassion and psychological inflexibility interact to predict PTSD symptom severity. JContextual Behav Sc. 2015;4(1):37–41. [DOI]
5. Shafiei M, Mirdarikvand F, Heidarirad H. The structural relationships of self-Compassion, cognitive flexibility and symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder in victims of trauma in West of Iran. J Res Psych Heal. 2018;12(2):14–29. [Persian]
6. Buttelmann F, Karbach J. Development and Plasticity of Cognitive Flexibility in Early and Middle Childhood. Front Psychol. 2017;8:1040. [DOI]
7. Purnamaningsih EH. Personality and emotion regulation strategies. Int j psychol res. 2017;10(1):53–60. [DOI]
8. Cooper D, Yap K, Batalha L. Mindfulness-based interventions and their effects on emotional clarity: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Affect Disord. 2018;235:265–76. [DOI]
9. Nurizadeh Mirabadi M, Khastari S, Shirmardi S, Bamdad S, Khosravi Farsani A. The effectiveness of emotion regulation intervention on alexithymia and cognitive emotion regulation strategies with in patients with coronary heart disease. J New Advances in Behav Sci. 2017;2(10):1–13. [Persian] [Article]
10. Schoorl J, van Rijn S, de Wied M, van Goozen S, Swaab H. Emotion regulation difficulties in boys with oppositional defiant disorder/conduct disorder and the relation with comorbid autism traits and attention deficit traits. PLoS ONE. 2016;11(7):e0159323. [DOI]
11. Wilamowska ZA, Thompson-Hollands J, Fairholme CP, Ellard KK, Farchione TJ, Barlow DH. Conceptual background, development, and preliminary data from the unified protocol for transdiagnostic treatment of emotional disorders. Depress Anxiety. 2010;27(10):882–90. [DOI]
12. Kaufman EA, Puzia ME, Mead HK, Crowell SE, McEachern A, Beauchaine TP. Children’s emotion regulation difficulties mediate the association between maternal borderline and antisocial symptoms and youth behavior problems over 1 year. J Pers Disord. 2017;31(2):170–92. [DOI]
13. Moynihan JA, Chapman BP, Klorman R, Krasner MS, Duberstein PR, Brown KW, et al. Mindfulness-based stress reduction for older adults: effects on executive function, frontal alpha asymmetry and immune function. Neuropsychobiology. 2013;68(1):34–43. [DOI]
14. Mousavinejad SM, Sanagouye Moharer G, Zarban A. The Effectiveness of Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy on Cognitive Flexibility and Perceived Stress of Type II Diabetic patients. Middle Eastern Journal of Disability Studies. 2018;(8):10. [Persian] [Article]
15. Movahedi M, Khaleghipour S, Vahabi Homabadi J. The effectiveness of process management strategies of excitement on the cognitive emotion regulation of adolescent girls with oppositional defiant disorder. Scientific Research Quarterly of Woman and Culture. 2018;9(34):111–28. [Persian] [Article]
16. Dennis JP, Vander Wal JS. The cognitive flexibility inventory: instrument development and estimates of reliability and validity. Cogn Ther Res. 2010;34(3):241–53. [DOI]
17. Roeen Fard M, Share H, Haghi E. The effectiveness of heimberg and becker cognitive behavioral group therapy in improving female adolescents social anxiety and cognitive flexibility. J Sabzevar Uni Med Sci. 2014;21(2):226–40. [Persian] [Article]
18. Aydın A. A Comparison of the alexithymia, self-compassion and humour characteristics of the parents with mentally disabled and autistic children. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2015;174:720–9. [DOI]
19. Besharat MA, Zahedi Tajrishi K, Noorbala AA. Alexithymia and emotion regulation strategies in patients with somatization, anxiety disorders, and normal individuals: A comparative study. Contemporary Psychology, Biannual Journal of the Iranian Psychological Association. 2014;8(2):3–16. [Persian] [Article]
20. Gross JJ, Thompson RA. Emotion Regulation: Conceptual Foundations. In: Gross JJ. Handbook of Emotion Regulation, First Edition. Guilford Press; 2007.
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
