Posted by alexandra_k on December 22, 2005, at 0:56:06
In reply to Re: I suppose I should also clarify » alexandra_k, posted by Dinah on December 21, 2005, at 9:56:30
Hmm.
> So that as I have myself found, reassurances that vomit can't hurt me don't work, because they miss the point.
:-)
So you don't mean for them to revise the textbooks then?you know...
if that is right...
then phobias might not be irrational emotions (in the way they are typically thought to be irrational)
:-)> And dog vomit avoids being vomit because it escapes the primary association with vomit, intense painful emotional arousal. While quickly making plans wherever I go for how to make an escape should someone vomit is helpful enough to keep me from being housebound.
Hmm. Maybe dog vomit doesn't have vomit spirit because you love your dogs very much?
dunno...
> And CBT'ers might well miss the point by giving the wrong correcting information if they try to overcome a phobia with reason. Even if it did work, even a bit.
heh heh.
> And flooding and exposure therapy might just prove that yes indeed, intense negative arousal does accompany exposure to the object.ah. the idea with flooding / exposure therapy... would be to... i dunno. tie you to a chair with vomit all over you or something. yeah you would freak out for a bit... (high levels of emotional arousal) but over time... what happens... is that your body gets tired... and your level of emotional arousal return to baseline. and then... you aren't supposed to feel the bad feelings anymore.
dunno what the ethics of flooding / that kind of exposure are in regards to human subjects...
> While maybe being held by someone you love or being given some other positive reinforcer, or exposure with large doses of sedative, might possibly raise doubt as to the inevitable conclusion. Which is why exposure therapy with a therapist that the client has a good rapport with is probably better than exposure therapy with a therapist that the client isn't too crazy about.i think it is the body getting tired (so the emotion ceases) that is considered to be crucial...
> As for the dog, I didn't have long term followup. The dog had been removed from a (clearly) less than ideal arrangement, and we placed her in a loving home.You can have spontaneous (i forget the term) when an extinguished behaviour starts to occur again. i think... that next time around it is supposed to extinguish faster though...
> But I'd say that it wouldn't be impossible that the dog had ambivilant responses to the towel.
right. but that could be dealt with at the time...
> Because to my recollection, the dog never lost her awareness that this was a *towel*. And I wouldn't consider the poor thing cured unless she could consider the towel just another neutral object that humans are unaccountably fond of collecting when they could have instead chosen to collect smelly poorly identified objects from outside, or the yummy bones and scraps that the silly things just throw away.
yeah. but if you didn't observe any avoidance / fear... then i guess the object was viewed as neutral...
poster:alexandra_k
thread:590579
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/psycho/20051216/msgs/591190.html