- I am broadly interested in the role of psychophysiological factors in psychological distress, specifically self-harm and suicide. My work mainly focuses on investigating the relationship between emotional and physical pain in those with suicidal ideation or who have made a suicide attempt, as we... moreI am broadly interested in the role of psychophysiological factors in psychological distress, specifically self-harm and suicide. My work mainly focuses on investigating the relationship between emotional and physical pain in those with suicidal ideation or who have made a suicide attempt, as well as individuals who have thought about or engaged in non-suicidal self-harm (NSSI). Another major strand of my research looks at altered physical pain tolerance in suicide and NSSI. My PhD also explored the psychological factors which may be related to altered emotional and physical pain sensitivity, such as social perfectionism, rumination, emotion regulation, and feelings of defeat. I am particularly interested in psychological mechanisms that underlie the transition from suicidal ideation to behaviour and how we can develop psychosocial interventions to target these. Additional interests include other potential physiological biomarkers of psychological distress (endogenous opioids and endocannabinoids), and aspects of executive functioning, including inhibition and problem-solving.edit
Research Interests:
Self-Harm: Commonalities Between Ideators and Enactors Introduction and aims: The Integrated Motivational Volitional (IMV) model of suicidality (O’Connor, 2011) specifically differentiates between those who ideate about self-harm... more
Self-Harm: Commonalities Between Ideators and Enactors
Introduction and aims:
The Integrated Motivational Volitional (IMV) model of suicidality (O’Connor, 2011) specifically differentiates between those who ideate about self-harm (ideators) and those who go on to engage in self-harm (enactors). Although the model was developed with suicidal behaviour in mind, it is applicable to self-harm irrespective of motivation. The model predicts that those who ideate but do not act on these thoughts and those who enact the behaviour will not differ on pre-motivational personality and motivational phase variables, such as social perfectionism and rumination respectively. The current study aimed to further investigate the validity of the IMV for self-harm and replicate part of the findings of O’Connor et al.(2012).
Methods:
306 healthy adults completed an online battery of self-report measures assessing self-harm and depression as well as self-criticism, social perfectionism (pre-motivational variables) and rumination, (motivational phase variables).
Results:
The prevalence of self-harm enactment within the sample was almost 21% and ideation only was almost 8%. The majority of the enactment group had no history of suicidal ideation and as with the ideation group, most had no history of psychiatric disorder. As predicted, results showed that there were significant differences in all factors between the two self-harm groups (ideation and enactment) and control groups, but no significant differences between ideation and enactor groups.
Conclusions:
Findings demonstrated that there were no significant differences in motivational phase variables between self-harm ideators and enactors, however both groups were significantly different from controls. This supports the validity of the IMV model for self-harm.
Introduction and aims:
The Integrated Motivational Volitional (IMV) model of suicidality (O’Connor, 2011) specifically differentiates between those who ideate about self-harm (ideators) and those who go on to engage in self-harm (enactors). Although the model was developed with suicidal behaviour in mind, it is applicable to self-harm irrespective of motivation. The model predicts that those who ideate but do not act on these thoughts and those who enact the behaviour will not differ on pre-motivational personality and motivational phase variables, such as social perfectionism and rumination respectively. The current study aimed to further investigate the validity of the IMV for self-harm and replicate part of the findings of O’Connor et al.(2012).
Methods:
306 healthy adults completed an online battery of self-report measures assessing self-harm and depression as well as self-criticism, social perfectionism (pre-motivational variables) and rumination, (motivational phase variables).
Results:
The prevalence of self-harm enactment within the sample was almost 21% and ideation only was almost 8%. The majority of the enactment group had no history of suicidal ideation and as with the ideation group, most had no history of psychiatric disorder. As predicted, results showed that there were significant differences in all factors between the two self-harm groups (ideation and enactment) and control groups, but no significant differences between ideation and enactor groups.
Conclusions:
Findings demonstrated that there were no significant differences in motivational phase variables between self-harm ideators and enactors, however both groups were significantly different from controls. This supports the validity of the IMV model for self-harm.
Research Interests:
Background A growing body of research has explored altered physical pain threshold and tolerance in non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) and suicidal self-harm. The evidence, however, is inconsistent such that the nature of the relationship... more
Background
A growing body of research has explored altered physical pain threshold and tolerance in non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) and suicidal self-harm. The evidence, however, is inconsistent such that the nature of the relationship is unclear, and whether or not this effect is also present in suicidal self-harm is equivocal.
Methods
A keyword search of three major psychological and medical databases (PsycINFO, Medline and Web of Knowledge) was conducted, yielding 1,873 records. Following duplicate removal and screening, 25 articles were quality assessed, and included in the final systematic review.
Results
There is strong evidence for increased pain tolerance in NSSI, and some evidence for this in suicidal individuals, but notably, there were no prospective studies. The review found a lack of substantive focus on psychological correlates of altered pain tolerance in this population. Several candidate explanatory mechanisms were proposed within the reviewed studies.
Limitations
The current review was a narrative systematic review; methods used to assess pain were considered too heterogeneous to conduct a meta-analysis.
Conclusions
The evidence suggests that there is elevated pain tolerance among those who engage in NSSI. Future prospective research should determine if altered pain tolerance is a cause or a consequence of the behaviour. The identification of psychological correlates of increased pain tolerance is a neglected area of research. It could provide opportunities for treatment/intervention development, if mediating or moderating pathways can be identified. Too few studies have directly investigated candidate explanatory mechanisms to draw definitive conclusions.
A growing body of research has explored altered physical pain threshold and tolerance in non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) and suicidal self-harm. The evidence, however, is inconsistent such that the nature of the relationship is unclear, and whether or not this effect is also present in suicidal self-harm is equivocal.
Methods
A keyword search of three major psychological and medical databases (PsycINFO, Medline and Web of Knowledge) was conducted, yielding 1,873 records. Following duplicate removal and screening, 25 articles were quality assessed, and included in the final systematic review.
Results
There is strong evidence for increased pain tolerance in NSSI, and some evidence for this in suicidal individuals, but notably, there were no prospective studies. The review found a lack of substantive focus on psychological correlates of altered pain tolerance in this population. Several candidate explanatory mechanisms were proposed within the reviewed studies.
Limitations
The current review was a narrative systematic review; methods used to assess pain were considered too heterogeneous to conduct a meta-analysis.
Conclusions
The evidence suggests that there is elevated pain tolerance among those who engage in NSSI. Future prospective research should determine if altered pain tolerance is a cause or a consequence of the behaviour. The identification of psychological correlates of increased pain tolerance is a neglected area of research. It could provide opportunities for treatment/intervention development, if mediating or moderating pathways can be identified. Too few studies have directly investigated candidate explanatory mechanisms to draw definitive conclusions.
Research Interests:
Those who self-harm have been shown to be less sensitive to physical pain, but more sensitive to emotional pain, appearing to contradict social neuroscience research that suggests that individuals who are more sensitive to physical pain... more
Those who self-harm have been shown to be less sensitive to physical pain, but more sensitive to emotional pain, appearing to contradict social neuroscience research that suggests that individuals who are more sensitive to physical pain are also more sensitive to emotional pain. The current study investigated the relationship between self-reported emotional pain sensitivity and physical pain distress in those who think (ideate) about and engage in (enact) self-harm. A total of 351 healthy adults completed a battery of anonymous online questionnaires assessing emotional sensitivity, physical pain distress and sensitivity, and lifetime history of self-harm, as well as depressive symptoms, self-critical style, perfectionistic cognitions, and perfectionistic self-presentation. Emotional sensitivity and physical pain distress were higher in both the self-harm ideation and enactment groups than in controls and there was a significant ordered effect, such that the enactment group was more sensitive to emotional and physical pain than the ideation group. A similar significant ordered effect in physical pain sensitivity was observed only when controlling for previous suicide attempt. Within the ideation group, physical pain distress and self-critical style were the only factors significantly associated with emotional pain sensitivity, but only the presence of perfectionistic cognitions was significantly associated with emotional pain sensitivity in the enactment group. Taken together, the findings suggest an association between self-perceived emotional sensitivity and physical pain distress in self-harm ideation, but possibly a disconnection between self-perceived and behavioral sensitivity to physical pain in self-harm enactment. Furthermore, self-criticism and perfectionism may be differentially associated with emotional sensitivity in self-harm ideation and enactment.
Research Interests:
Relief from emotional pain is a frequently cited reason for engaging in non-suicidal self-injury. The exact mechanism by which self-injury brings about this relief is unknown, but the potential role of endogenous opioids in affective... more
Relief from emotional pain is a frequently cited reason for engaging in non-suicidal self-injury. The exact mechanism by which self-injury brings about this relief is unknown, but the potential role of endogenous opioids in affective regulation has been posited. Few studies have investigated this and there are a number of methodological challenges to measuring endogenous opioid activity in this population. Furthermore as the majority of research to date has focused on inpatients with borderline personality disorder (BPD), it is uncertain if the findings of previous studies would also apply to those who self-injure but who do not have BPD. Whether or not altered endogenous opioid levels are a cause or a consequence of self-injury is unknown and to this end, comparing self-injury ideators with enactors, may offer a window of insight. Another candidate system, the endocannabinoid system, should also be explored in relation to this research question. The current commentary aims to tease apart the methodological issues in this area of research and stimulate further discussion of this topic.