The Communal Coping Model of Pain Catastrophizing (CCMPC) postulates that pain catastrophizing occurs within social contexts as a way to communicate the need for support or empathy from others. An implied assumption of the CCMPC is that those individuals who catastrophize also feel entitled to pain-related support. To date, the majority of studies evaluating the CCMPC have focused on understanding the impact of pain catastrophizing on spousal support. The specific problem is that pain support provider characteristics may influence support provision, but there is no solid scientific evidence that the relationship of the person with pain to the pain support provider may be just as important given individuals elicit responses from close others, differently. This study is a quantitative quasi-experimental study to assess and compare the relationship between perceived entitlement to pain support and punishing pain-related perceived support among cohabitating couples and cohabitating parent/adult children dyads. Cohabitating couples were evaluated to validate a previously conducted seminal work among couples and cohabitating parent/adult child dyads were evaluated and compared to cohabitating couples as an original contribution. The participants in this study included a convenience sample of 200 subjects seeking treatment at a pain clinic in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. Multiple regression analyses was used to evaluate the relationship between the data collected from the solicitude subscale of the Survey of Pain Attitudes (SOPA) and the punishing response subscale of the West Haven-Yale Multidimensional Pain Inventory (MPI). A t-test and ANCOVA were also used to compare couples and parent/adult child dyads. The relationship between perceived entitlement to pain support and the perception of punishing pain-related support was significant, F (1, 133) =35.52, p = .00 among couples and among subjects living with a parent, F (1, 55) = 48.67, p = .00. The difference between the living situation groups on perceived entitlement to pain support and on perception of punishing pain-related support was not significant, t (193) = - 1.20, p = .23 and t (195) = - .76, p = .45, respectively. There was also no significant difference between the living situation groups in the relationship between perceived entitlement to pain support and punishing pain-related perceived support, F (1, 189) = .021, p = .89. Recommendations for future research include, the use of a more heterogeneous population to conduct observational studies, to conduct further research among parent/child dyads and among other dyads, as well as to conduct studies that work to better understand the interpersonal dimensions of pain.
|Commitee:||Avena, Nicola, Egbert, Robert|
|School Location:||United States -- Arizona|
|Source:||DAI-B 77/06(E), Dissertation Abstracts International|
|Keywords:||Chronic headache, Communal coping model of pain catastrophizing, Pain catastrophizing, Pain-related support, Perceived entitlement, Punishing support|
Copyright in each Dissertation and Thesis is retained by the author. All Rights Reserved
The supplemental file or files you are about to download were provided to ProQuest by the author as part of a
dissertation or thesis. The supplemental files are provided "AS IS" without warranty. ProQuest is not responsible for the
content, format or impact on the supplemental file(s) on our system. in some cases, the file type may be unknown or
may be a .exe file. We recommend caution as you open such files.
Copyright of the original materials contained in the supplemental file is retained by the author and your access to the
supplemental files is subject to the ProQuest Terms and Conditions of use.
Depending on the size of the file(s) you are downloading, the system may take some time to download them. Please be