Behar: current theoretical models of Generalized Anxiety Disorder

This article criticizes five contemporary models of GAD and gives implications for
treatment. Borkovec began his model on avoidance of worry, which consists of various
mechanisms. Nowadays GAD further refined and tested. In 5 models, the emphasis is on
conceptual similarities and differences, after which a discussion followed about the
treatments that are based on each model.
*

was introduced as a unique diagnosis in the DSM

III, but was often used as a residual diagnosis for patients who did not meet the diagnosis of
another anxiety disorder.
* Later in the DSM-III-R was defined by GAD worry chronic and pervasive. According to
the DSM-IV GAD is characterized by excessive, uncontrollable worry about many different
subjects that several days is going not for a period of at least six months. The worrying makes
for poor stress / suffering and / or dysfunction and is associated with at least 3 of the
following properties:
- Restlessness or feel to live on the edge
- Quickly tired.
- Trouble concentrating or have blackouts.
- Irritability
- Tense muscles.
*The evolution of GAD and the treatment:

Sleep problems.

Psychotropic medication and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) are both effective in
treating GAD, although the evidence is not consistent. Medication or has an effect on
reducing the symptoms of GAD, but does nothing to the worry.
^ CBT other hand, is an effective treatment relative to a placebo, no treatment, waiting list
and a non-directive supportive therapy. Moreover, there are still visible improvements CBT
after one year. In a meta-analysis was, moreover, an effect size of -1.15 found to reduce
fretting.
*

*Now various model are discussed:

Avoidance Model of Worry (AMW)

This model is based on the two-stage theory of fear of Mowrer and also makes use of the
model of emotional processing Foa and Kozak. AMW says worrying is a verbal and thoughts
based activity that inhibits vivid imagination and associated somatic and emotional
activation. This inhibition of somatic and emotional experience connect the emotional
processing of fear from that theoretically required for successful adaptation and extinction.
On the other hand, the increase of somatic and emotional experience lead to effective
processing of emotional cues. Adaptation and extinction can be achieved by exposure to the
full spectrum of anxiety cues including the feared stimulus itself, the response to the stimulus
and the potential meaning behind the fear ^ so worrying can be seen as an ineffective
cognitive attempt to solve problems and thus delete a threat, while at the same time the
aversive somatic and emotional experience which would normally occur during the process
of anxiety confrontation, can be avoided.
*

In addition, the experience of peaks is energized negative. Catastrophic mental images that
are replaced enter the worry process less stressful and less verbal activity. ^ worrying is
negatively reinforced by the removal of aversive and frightening images.
* Moreover worrying further confirmed by positive beliefs as worrying helps problem
solving, motivates performance and avoid negative future outcomes. Positive beliefs are
energized when negative future events do not occur or are effectively held in the hand so
there is less worried.
* Finally Borkovec claimed et al., Which poor interpersonal skills are likely to play a role in
the maintenance of GAD. Also, poor attachment and trauma can make a contribution to the
development of GAD. In case of poor attachment, the world is perceived as a dangerous
place, and people with GAD do not have good sources to deal with uncertain events.
- Empirical support: worrying is mainly verbal instead of imaginary. Worrying
reduce somatic arousal at rest and when exposed to threat. Patients with GAD
also probably need more time to go to basic levels of arousal. People with GAD
believe worrying a good distraction from emotional issues which proves that this
is used as a strategy to avoid emotional process. Also, poor attachment plays a
role, but more research is needed. People with GAD focus primarily on problems
in interpersonal relationships.
- Treatment: cognitive behavioral techniques, inter alia,
a. self-monitoring of external situations, thoughts, feelings, physiological reactions
and behavior
b. relaxation exercises such as progressive muscle training, breathing exercises
and
make nice performances in the imagination.
c. self-desensitization
d. Gradual stimulus by looking for a specific time + place for worrying.
e. cognitive restructuring, flexibility thinking promote
f. Monitors worrying behavior.
*

g.

Now promoting focus of attention in the h. free life expectancy.

The Intolerance of Uncertainty Model (IUM)

Intolerance uncertainty plays an important role in the development and maintenance of GAD.
Uncertainty / ambiguity is stressful and creates negative emotions ^ constant worrying in
such situations. Patients with GAD believe that worrying causes certain events do not occur,
or that they are better than the situation can deal ^ negative problem orientation, and
cognitive avoidance ^ worrying is maintained.
* People who have experienced a negative problem orientation, inter alia suffer from: lack of
confidence in their problem-solving skills, problems are seen as threats, are easily frustrated
if they want to solve a problem and are pessimistic about the outcome of their problemsolving efforts.
* Schedule: situation ^ what if? ^ Positive beliefs about worrying ^ ^ worrying fear negative
problem orientation, and cognitive avoidance ^ what if? ^ Process leading to complete
exhaustion.
- Emperical support: uncertainty intolerance (IU) specific for GAD. IU and

negative problem orientation predict severity GAD symptoms. IU significant

differences between people with GAD and control. IU = cognitive vulnerability
which contributes to the development of GAD. Improvements in IU can reduce
worry!
Treatment: tolerance and acceptance of uncertainty improving aid of promote
self-monitoring, education, evaluation of thoughts of worry, problem orientation
and investigations fears. Problems as opportunities instead of threats and that they
are part of everyday life.

The Metacognitive Model (MCM)

*Individuals with GAD have 2 types of worrying:

positive beliefs about worry itself, worrying about non-cognitive events such
as external situations or physical symptoms. This stimulates a fear response but later
can actually reduce anxiety. For Type 1 worry, negative beliefs about worry activated.

1) Type 1:

^
2)

Patients with GAD will worry about Type 1 worry; they are afraid that the worrying is
uncontrollable and can be dangerous. This "worrying about worrying 'is Type 2: metaworry. Type 2 is the most important distinction between GAD and non-clinical
worriers.
- Empirical support: Individuals with GAD do not differ significantly in their
reported positive beliefs about worry. Evidence for Type 2 worry in GAD, but the
differences with others depend on what groups you compare disorders. E.g. same
levels of type 2 OCD and PD.
- Treatment: Change Type 2 worry. Teaching alternative coping. Changing
emphasis on cognitions related to seeing worrying if something good (type 1). For
treatment to be asked about thoughts of the client and is working on socialization
+ give homework.
^ MCT but not IUM gave significant improvements with regard to worrying and
anxiety with respect to monitoring and waiting list condition. No significant
differences in symptom reduction between MCT and IUM-treatments.

The Emotion Dysregulation Model (EDM)

Comes from the theory of emotion and the regulation of emotional states in general. Consists
of 4 central components: emotional hyperarousal / intense (mostly negative) emotions, less
understanding of their emotions, more negative attitudes about emotions and maladaptive
emotion regulation so they end up in a worse emotional state than they started.
* Worrying is used as an ineffective strategy with emotions to go.
- Emperical Support: aid patients with GAD negative but not positive emotions
experienced stronger. Evidence for intense emotions and less understanding of
their own emotions. Even more emotional coping strategies. However, findings
are not consistent, not all components found in some studies.
-

emotion regulation therapy. Is still in development. Teaching

coping and understanding emotions.
Behandeling: ERT:

 Acceptance-Based Model of GAD (ABM)

internal experiences, problematic relationship with internal

experiences, amenities and avoidant behavior restriction.
* The problematic relationship with internal experiences such as thoughts, feelings and
physical sensations consists of 1. Negative reactions to internal experiences and 2. Fusion
with internal experiences, that is, believe that these experiences are permanent and therefore a
property of yours.
- Emperical support: There are several restrictions on existing research of this
model. The model is in fact still in development, so that the concepts can not be
entirely clear and are based on personal views.
- Treatment:
acceptance-based behavioral therapy for GAD (ABBT)
^ Consists of three broad treatment components: 1. Psycho-education about ABM,
2. Mindfulness and acceptance exercises and 3. Change of behavior and valued
actions. Focus on living in the present and accepting internal sensations and
coping.
* General criticism models and research: extensive use of questionnaires and long term
should be better explored. Despite the limitations, the models have a valuable contribution to
the understanding and treatment of GAD.
*Contain 4 components:

Borkovec: Worry: A Cognitive Phenomenon Intimately Linked to Affective, Physiological,

and Interpersonal Behavioral Processes
Introduction

Everyone is sometimes worried, but when it is excessive and unbearable, one can speak of
chronic worrying and thus: Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD). The central feature of it is
to make chronic concerns. The DSM-IV GAD is classified as anxiety disorders.
* This article has two goals:
a) Describing the processes

in the response systems associated with worry,

and probably related to its occurrence.
b) Describe the interaction between elements for preservation / maintenance / reinforce
the worries may lead.

Origin and functions of worry

Concerns relating to dominance of (verbal) negative thoughts. Including: adverse events that
may occur. Imagination is less here.
GAD people compared with healthy people, about level of thoughts
imagination in a relaxed moment. Found that healthy people positive images and had little
thoughts, BUT GAD patients had just as many negative thoughts and imaginings. Following
whether one was concerned about a recent event, it turned out that they just had more
negative thoughts or imaginings. This was true for both groups.
^ The distinction between the two phenomena cognitive thought and imagination is very
important to understand their role in emotional disturbance and there treatment.
-E.g: thoughts about something scary recall little to no cardiovascular response, while
imagining about it did.
* Thoughts ensure that we do not immediately have to react to something, but we can
think about the best way of reaction and the possible consequences of that reaction.
*Exp Borkovec;

Two Stage Theory of Anxiety (Mowrer):

Many modern behavioral therapy is based on

this, on the basis of therapeutic exposure techniques. The underlying idea is that a
conditioned response of the conditioned stimuli. Exposure is an important technique
to take place "extinction".
^ Worrying

is a cognitive avoidance / evasion are perceived as dangers.

*Functions of Worrying
1) Worry diminishes Somatic Activity: True for GAD patients
* Short-term: suppression of cardiovascular response, but how

this works, we do not

know yet. It may be related to suppression of aversive imaginations and therefore we
react physically less. But it is probably true that worrying thoughts direct cognitive
avoid cleansing reaction to such aversive imaginations.
Further, it may be that people focus more on "verbal thoughts" and therefore more
thought going in abstract terms (such as "there is something bad will happen") instead
of getting a concrete picture for you. And so also reduce activation of cardiovascular
response.

2) Worrying is an attempt to avoid negative events, or to prepare for the worst: Not
true for GAD patients, make them only more worried about something that is not
actually present.
* Long-term; has asked GAD and healthy patients what their reasons for worry

(Borkovec):
a) It helps them to avoid future negative events.
b) It prepares them for the worst, it might can not be avoided.

* Cognitive Model of Worry (Eysenck): Worry would have three main functions:
a) Alarming: after you get external or internal threat information, the alarm function

ensures that the threat information to consciousness.

b) Prompt / activate / encourage: This feature brings threat-related thoughts and images
of the Long-Term Memory to consciousness.
c) Preparation: This feature leads to anticipation of adverse events of the future
(catastrophizing).
- And

this feature also leads to coping: First, you can try to avoid the negative occurrence
(prevention). Second, you can prepare for the event if you can not avoid
(Anticipatory coping).
* When going chronic worriers believe worrying about the problem has positive effects (eg
preventing nasty stuff) then it is a reinforcement (reinforcement) for the thoughts and
therefore a reason for them to have this behavior maintained.
Could be true for GAD patients, but is
still considering the speculative hypotheses.
GAD patients may worry about superficial things, to lead away from the worry about
the real underlying problem (loss of job means eg inability to care for oneself).
However, it is not real evidence for this. Other research has brought evidence, what

3) Worry as a distraction from emotional topics:

*

these underlying problems may include:

GAD patients report more traumatic experiences than normal people. Although they are
less concerned about disease / death or injury. The concerns they may therefore emanate from
the traumas they have experienced, that prove existence hazards. And this, they must
therefore anticipate again for next situation, and make sure all while providing a distraction
on their past.
a)

b) GAD patients have more problems in interpersonal relationships than the healthy
people. By worrying about other things, this is their avoidance of imminent danger.

Worrying & conditioning

* Because negative reinforcement they get

from worrying (taken away something

negative: the worry) this will make to the strengthening and preservation of the
concerns.

People with and without GAD negative / neutral and threatening words to
be read: Turns out that GAD patients give a defensive response to negative words, but not the
neutral. People without GAD showed both no response.
In addition, educated people with GAD an orienting response to negative words
conditioned. So aversive words can provoke classically conditioned responses to previous
neutral stimuli. So, the (higher) conditioning can be seen as a partial cause of the occurrence
of hypersensitivity to the perception of threat and generalization of threatening cues.
*Exp (Borkovec):

Worry and other Information processing

* GAD patients see more negative information

and know yourself a greater chance of

the occurrence of negative events in the future (Mathews).
* GAD patients recognize and respond more quickly to threatening cues than "healthy
people". But are not aware of it themselves.
GAD patients have less cognitive flexibility. In addition, the worry leads to a reduction of
variability on the topics listed in the conscious phase than in the rest phase.
* GAD patients may experience slower decisions, worry about something leads to
slower reactions, especially in an ambiguous test. People worry too much, showing
more procrastination and more perfectionist. Which comes, by increased worries
about mistakes and doubts about actions.
Worrying & Depression

Excessive worry can lead to maintain / enhance other disorders: OCD and Depression.
* Nolen/Hoeksema: are of the opinion that to worry ensures the maintenance of a
depressed state. A sense of hopelessness can cause GAD patients think they can
change nothing in the situation, and that which they fear will actually happen.
Risk factors for GAD development
* GAD is also found in people

who have a poor attachment bond with the care giver.

Cassisdy found that GAD patients in their youth, had to carry more care and
anticipating danger for both themselves and their care givers.
> this can lead to later remember that the world is dangerous, and doubts as to whether
good coping skills possession.
* Many GAD patients are concerned about others (Pincus). This is because they have
learned in their youth to care for others is necessary in order to be accepted and loved.
And so they put this pattern into adulthood.
This can lead to others in the feeling, which people with GAD are intrusive, contributing
in their attempt to worry.
GAD patients have another sympathetic
activation in response to fear or threat than other patients with other anxiety disorders ^ GAD
patients be clear then stands in a sympathetic inhibition.
Physiological characteristics of worrying and GAD

GAD patients taking constant danger true, but this danger can not be avoided, because it is in their
thoughts and concerns future events. Because of this, fight or flight responses of no use and can only
be suppressed. This suppression can be achieved by mulling and to worry about. People with GAD
have a preattentive bias, and less inhibitory processes.
*

GAD patients have different brain activity. To make this clear it is by means of EEC

measured brain activity of people with GAD and people without GAD both
"relaxation phase" as in "make do" phase. GAD patients also received 14 sessions of
therapy. It turned out that GAD patients:
Showed more activity in the left hemisphere.
GAD patients and healthy people to worry and relax in different ways, mainly in the
alpha wave (8-13Hz). This finding is consistent with the idea that GAD patients
imagine less, but create more verbal concerns.
Further GAD patients showed more left frontal beta activity while worrying, Healthy
people are more theta. This shows that healthy people focus differently on the job
where you have to worry.
Normalization of brain activity ^ as therapy progressed, their brain activity was more
gone towards that of "healthy people".

Summary & Conclusion

* Worried because of

"verbal thoughts" activity. This is part of the coping strategy

"cognitive avoidance" of threat, and inhibits emotional processing. Worrying can be
rewarded negative, and thereby strengthened and preserved.
*Worrying can lead to: (a) Anxiety, (b) depression
* Research showed that worry had an association with childhood memories about the
relationship with the caregiver, and interpersonal problems (particularly worrying
much for others).
* Behavior of people with GAD are poor interpersonal relationships and caring
behavior concernings others. They do this to avoid social criticism.
* GAD patients do take longer over decisions. This slows make punishment for mistakes for
example.
* Chronic worry also because people are sensitive to the perception of threat, and are
constantly looking for threats.
* Physically worry arises by a shortage of parasympathetic activity, and too much
activation of the left frontal lobe.
Dugas: GAD: a preliminary test of a conceptual model

uncertainty intolerance, beliefs

about worry, poor problem orientation, and cognitive avoidance.
* The reason to do this research is mainly because there has been too little research on GAD,
there is eg. Only 7.2% of GAD of articles about anxiety between 1990 and 1992. This make
that is based on theory, empirically is supported and has obvious clinical implications.
* Research has also shown that IU is strongly related to worrying, anxiety and depression.
Also distinguishes between GAD and healthy. Further, the distinction between GAD and
excessive worriers.
* An important point is that the model mulling undervalues the contribution of beliefs about,
eg. Worrying helps against disappointment. Recent findings have shown that beliefs about
worry are related to the level of worry and that compared with healthy average worriers,
GAD patients believe that worrying helps better to find solutions and prevent negative
outcomes. ^ People also have a greater tendency to have positive beliefs about the
consequences of esearch team wants a cognitive behavioral model of GAD.
* Worriers are also, in addition to inadequate problem-solving skills, even a worse problem
orientation (composed of problem perception, problem attribution, problem valuation, beliefs
about personal control and emotional response).
* Worriers have less confidence in problem solving and poor perceived control. Also worriers
and GAD patients more thoughts instead of mental images. This is the semantic cognitive
*Most important characteristics van het conceptual model:

activity which relates to the cognitive avoidance (avoidance of threatening = mental images)
which is also included in the model.
The aim of this study is to test the conceptual model of GAD, as there is anyway little
research has been done to GAD in itself. All the main features of the model are now included
in the same study. The study will help to obtain the relative importance of each of the
elements.
*

*Hypotheses:

Uncertainty Intolerance, beliefs about worry, poor problem orientation, and cognitive
avoidance GAD patients will discriminate against non-clinical control subjects.
2. Uncertainty Intolerance will be the most important variable in explaining differences
1.

*Method:
24 GAD-patients (17 women, 7 men) and 20 non-clinical control subjects (14 vrouwen, 6

Individuals with GAD also had social phobia (13), depression (4), PD
with agoraphobia (3), OCD (3), Dysthieme disorder (3), PD (2), and PTSD (1). The
classification is used questionnaires, inter alia IU questionnaire and anxiety questionnaire.
Also screening by psychiatrists.
*Results and discussion: * Significant difference between the groups on uncertainty
tolerance, beliefs about worry, thought suppression, problem orientation and problem solving
skills with p <.0001.
* There are still other analyzes done to look at the individual contributions of the variables.
Except for the problem-solving skills, the variables have contributed significantly to
distinguish between groups.
* First hypothesis is supported, as is the second hypothesis.
^ There is further research is needed because the GAD patients are compared to patients with
e.g. other anxiety disorders (in any case with clinical subjects). In other studies showed that
GAD patients have better knowledge about problem solving compared to patients with other
anxiety disorders.
* Moreover, there was a lot of co-morbidity. This may have exerted impact on the results,
many had also include social phobia. However, the severity of comorbid diagnoses was mild,
so the researchers do not believe that this has had a significant impact on the discriminant
capacity.
* The GAD patients were more depressed. They do have the same scores on uncertainty
tolerance, so is again assumed that this has no influence on the results.
mannen) participate.

* The

research team has also placed emphasis on two types worrying when a treatment is
done: 1. Concerns about immediate problems and 2. Concerns about improbable future
events.
* It should also be ensured that beliefs are corrected, as GAD patients often see more benefits
instead of disadvantages worrying. What helps is best cognitive exposure (imagination).

Wells: Preliminary tests of a cognitive model of generalized anxiety disorder

In summary:

preliminary test on the metacognitive model.

Introduction
* Prevalence of GAD runs from 3% to 5%. Central feature of GAD is chronic worrying.
* Worrying is a relatively normal cognitive process. Normal people make plans for the

future. However, individuals with GAD however make positive assumptions about the
benefits of worry as a coping strategy and thinking that worrying helps threat. Is
negatively reinforced by the frequent occurrence of the catastrophe.
* GAD is difficult to treat. Only 50% of patients improved with cognitive behavioral
therapy and there is great variability in the degree of improvement.
* The effectiveness of the treatment may improve if the treatment was based on a
specific cognitive model on the survival of GAD. In this model must cognitive and
behavioral factors are key contributing create chronic worries.
^Wells came with a cognitive model
that emphasizes the role of
metacognition in GAD. (See picture)
This article shows a study, which the
central prediction of this model test.
Explanation of this model: trigger;
stimulus / intrusive thoughts that
encourages thinking.
^ For example, you hear on the radio
that there was a car accident on the
highway, and you fear that your friend
is there.
^ This trigger activates your
metacognitive beliefs and provides
coping strategies (worry). People with
GAD believe have positive beliefs
about the benefits of worry as a coping strategy, as worrying for example, can bring solutions.
*Type 1 worring; this is the worrying about external events and non-cognitive internal events
(eg physical symptoms). These concerns may increase the anxiety and lead to cognitive and
somatic symptoms. The negative meta-beliefs are activated.
* When worrying conducted a time, and solutions have been found, anxiety will decrease. *
The feedback route of emotion type one cares, shows that reduction in emotion, as a result of
long-term worries, the type 1 worries can reduce in future threat. For example, you worry
about your brother ^ by calling him take off your emotions and worries. ^ In contrast, somatic
symptoms of anxiety can be interpreted in a negative way and they reinforce worries the Type
1.
*Type 2 Worrying/ meta worrying; At this stage makes one "concerned about his / her
worries." E.g: person with GAD develops the belief that worry will lead to a mental

breakdown. GAD patients develop so negative assumptions about their own concerns. In type
2 concerns, there are 3, there are processes that contribute to GAD in position and attitude
thereof, also can be seen in the model:
1) Behavior; there behavior is put into force to avoid situations / stimuli that can cause
worry. You keep worrying because you worries do not want. And this allows for the
preservation of type 2 concerns and negative assumptions. Avoiding them ensures that
you do not discover that worries may not catastrophic.
2) Control of mind; GAD patients suppress thinking of a stimulus that causes concern.
This, however, can lead to recurrent intrusive (undesirable) thoughts and an increase

in type 2 concerns.
Emotion; when type 2 activated worry, there is more anxiety by making the concerns
and find an increase in anxiety reactions take place. These emotions and anxiety
reactions are interpreted as evidence that the type 2 concerns and negative
assumptions are justified.
Method 2 measurements: PSWQ for people who worry at GAD level. And measurement of
subjective severity level associated with worry.
* Susceptibility to type 1 and type2-worries were measured Anxious Thoughts Inventory
(ANTI).
*Hypothesis: meta worries contribute to problematic worries problematic concerns. ^ If it is
found that type 2 worries is a greater predictor than one type of worries, then position the
model remains.
*140 subjects participated. They were students around 29.79 years.
3)

Results research of the model:

- Problem and pathological worry is

directly associated with type2 / meta-worry, instead of

Type 1 worry. Hypothesis and model is confirmed.
- Worry is problematic partly because it is used consistently and frequently as a coping
strategy.
- It is necessary modification of type 2 worries / meta-anxiety take place in the treatment of
pathological disorders worries, such as GAD.
Ladouceur: experimental manipulation of intolerance of uncertainty: a study of a
theoretical model of worry

has been shown in the previous article of Dugas uncertainty which intolerance is an
important variable that is related to worry and GAD.
*

* The

aim of the present study is to clarify the relationship between these cognitive processes
and fretting, on the basis of the experimental manipulation of uncertainty intolerance.
* A procedure with gambling is used to increase the intolerance in the one group (N = 21),
and in order to reduce the intolerance in the other group (N = 21).
* The results show that those who increased uncertainty tolerance have higher levels of worry
were compared with those who had reduced uncertainty intolerance. ^ The results give a
better picture of this relationship and are consistent with the theoretical model of peaks and
GAD.
*Krohne was the first to name uncertainty intolerance in the General model of Anxiety.

Krohne was the first to describe the variables uncertainty intolerance and intolerance of
emotional arousal as underlying variables of anxiety disorders in a model.
- An increased level of uncertainty creates intolerance reactions of hypervigiliteit
(= excessive attention) where the individuals are faced with ambiguous problems.
- An increased level of intolerance of emotional arousal stimulates cognitive
avoidance reactions. Excessive anxiety arises because there are always switching
between a hyper vigilante state and a state of avoidance.
* Worrying is characterized by, inter alia,:
a) Tended to see ambiguous situations
b)

Increased estimate of risk.

as threatening.

c)

Tend to think negative scenarios in uncertain situations.

* Uncertainty of the situation was acceptable for one group and unacceptable to the other,
without the objective chance of winning or change the consequences.
participants in the increased intolerance group will report a higher level of
fretting in comparison with the participants in the reduced intolerance group.
*Hypothesis:

In each condition many

men as women. The students were lack informs: the study would be about beliefs about
gambling, real target was not mentioned. There are also two surveys were conducted: a
manipulation check and how much they worry.
*Task: the player must have 15 consecutive trials in each of the three columns of 12 numbers
could offer the participant ($ 2). Each subject the task started with $ 20 and the program was
adjusted so that the final amount was $ 14. The researcher first explained the rules of
focussing on the opportunities associated with the three types of 'bets'. It was said that if the
final amount is $ 20 or higher that $ 100 goes to charity.
- Increasing intolerance participants received information several times that caused
the subjects were evaluating their chances of winning as unacceptable.
- Reduce intolerance say that the probability is very high to win, namely 1 to 3.
Also, it did not matter if they won, there would really be money going to charity.
*Method: 42 students (30 women, 12 men). Randomly assigned.

After the experiment, a manipulation check was made to see if the

uncertainty intolerance levels differed from each other, this turned out to be significant.
^ Then, a questionnaire was administered with questions about whether they pondered about
the money went to charity. On the basis of a t-test, there were significant differences in the
worry level between the lowered and raised uncertainty intolerance groups.
^ The hypothesis is confirmed and uncertainty intolerance is successfully manipulated,
making the link between worry and intolerance of uncertainty is attached.
* However, it is questionable whether there is a causal link or whether it is just a correlation.
According to Garber and Hollon this should be viewed by looking at the covariation (the
process must be present if the problem is present), temporal antecedent (one event precedes
the other) and the elimination of other possible causes.
^ Covariation is often demonstrated. With regard to temporal antecedentie is shown that a
reduction in uncertainty intolerance precedes a reduction in the tendency to worry during a
cognitive and behavioral treatment of GAD.
^ However, there is no evidence that the emergence of uncertainty intolerance precedes
worrying.
*Results and discussion: