ABSTRACT

While previous frameworks to address health behaviours through targeting underlying automatic processes have stimulated an improved understanding of related interventions, deciding between intervention strategies often remains essentially arbitrary and atheoretical. Making considered decisions has likely been hampered by the lack of a framework that guides the selection of different intervention strategies targeting automatic processes to reduce unhealthy behaviours. We propose a process framework to fulfil this need, building upon the process model of emotion regulation. This framework differentiates types of intervention strategies along the timeline of the unfolding automatic response, distinguishing between three broad classes of intervention strategies – direct antecedent, indirect antecedent, and response-focused. Antecedent-focused strategies aim to prevent the exposure to or activation of automatic responses directly through the avoidance of unwanted stimulus-response associations (i.e., situation modification or situation-specific response selection), or indirectly through automatising self-control (i.e., attentional deployment or cognitive change). Response-focused strategies aim to directly downregulate automatic unwanted responses (i.e., response modulation). Three main working hypotheses derived from this process framework provide practical guidance for selecting interventions, but await direct testing in future studies.

摘要

虽然以前通过针对潜在的自动过程来解决健康行为的框架促进了对相关干预措施的理解，但在干预策略之间做出决定通常仍然基本上是武断的和非理论的。由于缺乏一个框架来指导选择针对自动过程以减少不健康行为的不同干预策略，因此做出深思熟虑的决定可能会受到阻碍。我们提出了一个过程框架来满足这一需求，建立在情绪调节的过程模型之上。该框架沿展开的自动响应的时间线区分了干预策略的类型，区分了三大类干预策略——直接前因、间接前因和以反应为中心。以前因为中心的策略旨在通过避免不必要的刺激-反应关联（即情境修改或特定情境的反应选择）或间接通过自动化自我控制（即注意力部署）来防止暴露或激活自动反应或认知变化）。以响应为中心的策略旨在直接下调自动不需要的响应（即响应调制）。源自该过程框架的三个主要工作假设为选择干预措施提供了实际指导，但有待未来研究中的直接测试。或间接通过自动化自我控制（即注意力部署或认知改变）。以响应为中心的策略旨在直接下调自动不需要的响应（即响应调制）。源自该过程框架的三个主要工作假设为选择干预措施提供了实际指导，但有待未来研究中的直接测试。或间接通过自动化自我控制（即注意力部署或认知改变）。以响应为中心的策略旨在直接下调自动不需要的响应（即响应调制）。源自该过程框架的三个主要工作假设为选择干预措施提供了实际指导，但有待未来研究中的直接测试。