The relationship of expectancies to outcome in stress management treatment of essential hypertension: results from the joint USSR-USA behavioral hypertension project

Outcome expectancy and efficacy expectancy measures were made during the course of a cross-cultural comparison of thermal biofeedback and autogenic training as treatments for mild essential hypertension. There were no differences between groups at either pre- or posttreatment, and expectancy measure...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Biofeedback and Self-Regulation 1995-03, Vol.20 (1), p.51-63
Main Authors: WITTROCK, D. A, BLANCHARD, E. B, MCCOY, G. C, MCCAFFREY, R. J, KHRAMELASVILI, V. V
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adult
Arterial hypertension. Arterial hypotension
Autogenic Training
Biofeedback, Psychology
Biological and medical sciences
Blood and lymphatic vessels
Blood Pressure - physiology
Cardiology. Vascular system
Clinical manifestations. Epidemiology. Investigative techniques. Etiology
Female
Humans
Hypertension - physiopathology
Hypertension - therapy
Male
Medical sciences
Middle Aged
Treatment Failure
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Outcome expectancy and efficacy expectancy measures were made during the course of a cross-cultural comparison of thermal biofeedback and autogenic training as treatments for mild essential hypertension. There were no differences between groups at either pre- or posttreatment, and expectancy measures were not related to initial success or failure at the completion of treatment. However, both outcome and efficacy expectations were related to relapse over the three months immediately following the completion of treatment. Treatment failures had lower ratings for both outcome and efficacy expectations at the posttreatment assessment in comparison to treatment successes. Implications of these results are discussed.
ISSN:0363-3586
1573-3270
DOI:10.1007/BF01712766