The preliminary development of a measure to assess attitudes towards emotional expression

Perron.

individ.

DifJ

Vol.

Copyright

Pergamon

16. No. 6, pp. 869-875. 0

1994 Elsewer

Printed in Great Britain.

0191~8869(93)E0041-B

THE PRELIMINARY ASSESS

DEVELOPMENT

ATTITUDES

TOWARDS

0191.8869/94

OF A MEASURE

1994

Science Ltd

All tights reserved $7.00+0.00

TO

EMOTIONAL

EXPRESSION STEPHEN

JOSEPH,‘,* RUTH WILLIAMS,’ PAUL IRWINC~ and TOMMY CAMMOCK~

‘Department of Psychology, University of Essex, Wivenhoe Park, Colchester CO4 3SQ, England, ‘Department of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, De Crespigny Park, London SE5 8AF, England, ‘Department of Psychology, University of Ulster at Coleraine, Co. Londonderry, BT52 ISA, N. Ireland and Department of Psychology, University of Ulster at Jordanstown, Co. Antrim BT37 OQB, N. Ireland (Received 16 September

1993)

Summary-It has been suggested that attitudes towards emotional expression constitute one vulnerability factor for psychological disorder following the experience of a stressful life-event. However, although there has been much research on what are thought to be dysfunctional attitudes, no suitable measure currently exists with which to test this prediction. The aim of the present study, therefore, was to construct a measure of negative cognitions and behaviours concerning emotional expression. Psychometric data are presented on a 20.item scale with high internal reliability (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.90). Convergent validity of the scale was demonstrated by an examination of its association with seeking social support (r = - 0.46), in a sample of 180 undergraduates. Four second order factors were also identified: one behavioural coping style subscale (e.g. ‘when I’m upset I bottle up my feelings’); and 3 cognitive subscales to do with; (1) the meaning (e.g. ‘turning to someone else for advice or help is a sign of weakness’), (2) the expression (e.g. ‘I should always have complete control over my feelings’), and (3) the consequences (e.g. ‘my bad feelings will harm other people if I express them’) of showing emotions.

INTRODUCTION Clinical work with survivors of disaster has suggested that attitudes towards emotional expression may be important in the development and maintenance of psychiatric symptoms following exposure to a stressful life-event. Although there is a need for research to test this prediction, to the present authors’ knowledge, no suitable self-report measures currently exist with which to do so. The aim of the present study, therefore, was the preliminary development of such a measure. The idea that attitudes may be related to mental health is not a new one. It has been argued that the underlying assumptions held by individuals are a major determining factor in the aetiology of disorder (Beck, 1967; Beck, Rush, Shaw &Emery, 1979; Beck & Emery, 1985; Hollon & Beck, 1979; Hollon, Kendall & Lumry, 1986). In particular, Beck and Emery suggest that individuals have dysfunctional assumptions that predispose to anxiety and depression. These assumptions are rules for living acquired in childhood by which individuals maintain their self-esteem and sense of safety but which are too rigid, extreme and absolute in form. For example, they suggest that the need for control is sometimes represented in absolute black and white terms so that any deviation from absolute control tends to be conceived in terms of absolute lack of control. Drawing on these ideas, Williams (1993) has suggested that negative attitudes towards emotional expression may act to block processing of emotionally charged information following exposure to a traumatic event. For example, the attitude that expressing one’s emotions is a sign of weakness and that others should not be burdened with one’s problems. In a preliminary test of this prediction, Williams, Hodgkinson, Joseph and Yule (1993) constructed a 4-item measure of attitudes towards emotional expression on the basis of their clinical work with survivors of disaster. The items were: ‘I think you should always keep your feelings under control’; ‘I think you ought not to burden other people with your problems’; ‘I think getting emotional is a sign of weakness’ and ‘I think other people don’t understand your feelings’. These were summated to give a total scale score which was associated with emotional distress in survivors of the Herald of Free Enterprise disaster at 3 years (Williams et al., 1993; Joseph, Yule, Williams & Hodgkinson, in press). Although these data suggest that *To whom correspondence

should be addressed. 869

870

S-IWMN

JOSEPH

et d.

negative attitudes towards emotional expression may be a major factor in the development and maintenance of disorder following exposure to a stressful life-event, the work was correlational and no evidence for causality was presented. However, other experimental work on the role of confiding has suggested that a failure to do so results in poorer mental and physical health (Pennebaker, 1982; Pennebaker & Beall, 1986; Pennebaker, Hughes & O’Heeron, 1987). The possibility that there are individual differences in attitudes towards emotional expression and that these underlie coping behaviour and the failure to confide in others following a traumatic event holds considerable intrigue. However, at this stage, the structure of attitudes towards emotional expression is unclear and there is a need for a reliable and valid measure with which to test these predictions. Such a measure also promises to be useful in the study of dysfunctional attitudes and psychopathology generally. Although the Dysfunctional Attitude Scale (DAS) developed by Weissman and Beck (1978) has been used to measure the range of attitudes, beliefs, and assumptions which might be expected to predispose individuals to disorder, studies employing it have not always been successful in showing a causal link between cognitions and depression (Barnett & Gotlib, 1988; Haaga, Dyck & Ernst, 199 I ). One explanation for this is that the range of attitudes measured by the DAS is too global. It is necessary therefore to identify and measure specific vulnerabilities (Dyck & Stewart, 1991; Dyck, 1992). Barnett and Gotlib (1988) reviewed the evidence for a range of psychosocial constructs (dysfunctional attitudes, coping style, social support, and personality) concluding that any tendency to restrict social interaction would appear to be an important vulnerability factor. The aim of the present study, therefore, was to examine the factor structure of attitudes towards emotional expression and on the basis of these data to construct a specific scale with high internal reliability and convergent validity. Much research has demonstrated that social support is an important determinant of mental health in a variety of contexts (Sarason, Sarason & Pierce. 1990) and one construct which has received attention in the coping literature is that of seeking social support (Folkman & Lazarus, 1988; Carver, Scheier & Weintraub, 1989). It might be expected that more negative attitudes towards the expression ofemotions would be associated with reduced social support seeking following a distressing event. METHOD

Subjects Ss were 180 undergraduate students ( I35 women and 45 men) ranging in age from 18 to 40 years (mean = 20.89, SD = 6.4 1). All were students at the University of Ulster who completed the battery of questionnaires described below during class time and under supervision from the authors (SJ and TC). Measures Attitudes towards emotional expression: item selection. The first four items were those used previously by Williams ef al. (1993): ‘I think you should always keep your feelings under control’: ‘I think you ought not to burden other people with your problems’; ‘I think getting emotional is a sign of weakness’; and ‘I think other people don’t understand your feelings’. Further items reflecting similar themes were developed by the authors or selected from previous scales (Weissman & Beck, 1978; Roger & Najarian, 1989). It should be emphasized that we use the term attitude here to refer to cognitions (beliefs about emotional expression) and behaviours (tendencies to act in certain ways regarding emotional expression). In all. we developed 30 items (see Table 1) which appeared to reflect a range of cognitions and behaviours concerning the expression of emotions and which could be considered to inhibit social support seeking and therefore restrict social interaction when upset. Ss were asked to rate each item on a 5-point scale ranging from ‘Disagree very much’ ( I ) to ‘Agree very much’ (5). Social support. In order to test for convergent validity, Ss completed the seeking social support scale from the Ways of Coping Questionnaire (Folkman & Lazarus, 1988). This is a 6-item scale which describes efforts to seek informational (e.g. talked to someone to find out more about the situation), tangible (e.g. talked to someone who could do something concrete about the problem), and emotional

Attitudes towards emotional expression

871

(e.g. accepted sympathy and understanding from someone) support. Ss were asked to complete the scale in relation to a recent distressing event. Depression and anxiety. In addition, Ss completed the 21-item Beck Depression Inventory (BDI: Beck, Ward, Mendelson, Mock & Erbaugh, 1961) and the 20-item State Anxiety Inventory (STAI-Y 1: Spielberger, Gorsuch & Lushene, 1970).

RESULTS

Scores on the BDI (mean = 6.59, SD = 4.74) and the STAI-Y 1 (mean = 37.60, SD = 10.83) were within that expected of a non-clinical population.

Step I: principal

components

analysis

of all items

A principal components analysis with varimax rotation was conducted on all 30 of the items. This resulted in a 7-factor solution. Based on recommendations by Stevens (1986) a decision was made to only include items with factor loadings of 0.40. Factor 1, with an eigenvalue of 9.21, accounted for 30.7% of the extracted variance and had loadings on 8-items (items 5, 10, 14, 17, 20, 21, 26, and 30). Factor 2, with an eigenvalue of 2.77 accounted for 9.2% of the variance and had loadings on 6-items (items 3, 6, 12, 18, 19, and 28). Factor 3, with an eigenvalue of 2.07 accounted for 6.9% of the variance and had loadings on 6-items (items 1,2,6, 12,22, and 25). Factor 4, with an eigenvalue of 1.68, accounted for 5.6% of the variance and had loadings on 5-items (items 15, 21, 23, 24, and 27). Factor 5, with an eigenvalue of 1.35 accounted for 4.5% of the variance and had loadings on 4 items (items 4, 7, 8, and 9). Factor 6, with an eigenvalue of 1.17, accounted for 3.9% of the variance and had loadings on 4 items (items 10, 16,20, and 29). Factor 7, with an eigenvalue of 1.03, accounted for 3.4% of the variance and had loadings on 2-items (items 11 and 13).

Step 2: forced

4-factor

solution

As previous work has been critical of scales with < 5 items (Endler & Parker, 1990) we decided that 5 would be the criterion number of items for inclusion onto a single scale. Four factors had 5 or more items loading at 0.40 in the principal components analysis carried out in step 1. For this reason, a second principal components analysis using varimax rotation was conducted on all items with 4 factors stipulated to be extracted (see Table 1). The items making up each scale were inspected and the scales were characterized as: (1) discomfort expressing emotions and hiding feelings when upset; (2) the belief that emotional expression is a sign of weakness; (3) the belief that one should keep their emotions under control and not burden other people with them; and (4) the belief that expressing emotions will harm other people who will reject you. In addition, the first factor appeared to be tapping behavioural tendencies whereas the other factors appeared to be tapping cognitions about the meaning, expression, and consequences of emotional expression, respectively.

Step 3: subscale

item selection

Scales were computed on the basis of the step 2 data and item-total correlations calculated for all items with loadings of 0.40 or greater on each of the factors generated in step 2. In order to create subscales on the basis of these data, a decision was made as to which items were to be included on each of the subscales using two criteria. First, all those items with an item-total correlation < 0.40 were rejected (items 7, 21, and 24). Second, those items with the best face validity in terms of each factor’s characterization were retained. This resulted in four 5-item subscales: (1) beliefs about meaning (‘emotional expression is a sign of weakness’: items 3, 18, 19,27, and 28); (2) behavioural tendencies (‘bottle up feelings when upset’: items 5, 14, 17, 26, and 30); (3) beliefs about expression (‘keep in control’: items 1, 2, 6, 12, and 22); and (4) beliefs about consequences (‘social rejection’: items 4, 8, 9, 11, and 23).

872

STEPHEN JOSEPH er al.

I. Forced

‘able

j-factor

solution (varlmax rotation) for all 30-Items

Faclor

I

ElglXlVAle Percentane I. ithink you should alway\ keep your feelmg\ under control 2. I think you ought not to burden other people with your problem? 3. I think gettmg emotional i\ a sign of weakness I think other people don‘t 4. understnnd your feeling\ 5. When I’m upset, I bottle up my feeling\ You should always keep your 6. feelmg\ to yourself It‘s wrong tu upset other people 7. x. Other people will reject you if you upsrt them My bad feelings wdl harm other 9. people if I express them IO. I‘m not thr emotional type If I express my ftxlings I’m I I. vulnerablr to attack You should always hide your 12. feelings If I expres my feelings, the real 13. me wll show 14. When I’m upbet, I uwally try to hide how I feel If I showd my real self. people IS. wouldn’t accept me I can‘tshow my weaknesses 16. becaue other people rely on me I seldom show how I feel about 17. things Turning to wmeone elre for IX. advice or help is il sign of weaknc\\ It is shameful for il person to I’). di\plny his or her weaknesses 20. I’m not the sort of person who gets emotmnal I don’tfeel embarrassed about 21. expressmg my feeling:, I should always havr completr 27. control over my feel@ If other people know what you 23. xc really like, they will think I‘&\ of you Others can cure for me even if 24. they know ull my weakneaaev I think people show their feelings ‘5. too easily When I getupset I usutilly show 26. how

27. 2x. 29. 30.

I feel

People

9.21 30.7

3

2.77 9.2

2.07 6.9

4 I .68 5.6

0.66 0.4x 0.60

0.4 I 0.4s

0.79

0.59 o.so 0.67 0.70 0.62

0.44 032

0.45

0.5 I

0.77 O.SY

0.4

I

0.78

0.76 0.73 0.60

0.47

- 0.44 0.76

0.60

0.47

- 0.47

-0.71

will

reJKt you I( they know your weaknesser 11.il person asks for help. it is B sign of weakness It’v not like me to get upset I don’tfeel comfortable showing

2

my ernotion~

0.66 0.72 0.52

0.31

0.76

Loadings < 0.40 are excluded

Step 4: principal

components

analysis

ofselected items

A principal components analysis using varimax rotation without stipulation of the number of factors to be extracted was then conducted on these 20 selected items. The number of factors extracted should equal the number of factors (4) extracted in step 2, and the items from the same subscale should load on the one factor at 0.40 or greater (see Table 2). Four factors were generated which corresponded to the 4 subscales. Each of the subscale items had loadings higher than 0.47 on their respective factors and lower than 0.46 on the other factors confirming

Attitudes Table

2. Subwale

items

with

varlmax

towards

rotated

emotional

expression

loadings

and reliability

factor

873 coefficients

for each ~bscale

(n = 180) Factor loading Furor

I think

3

gettmg

1: he/ir$s

emorional

&out

mruning

Turning

I’).

It is shameful

21.

People

28.

If a person asks for help it IS a sign of weakness

will

else for advice

for a person reject

.Mean = 6.39.

or help is an admiwion

to display

you if they know

feel comfortable

showing

tutor

3:

he/i+

2.

I thmk

you ought

6.

You

should

Away\

keep your

feelings

12.

You

should

alway\

hide your

leelings

23.

I should

always

= X.94.

always

ohrt

you should

8.

Other My

other

have complete

If other

R indicates

people will

bad feelings

Mean

0 73 0.77

feelings

other people

(keep in contd)

he/i+

reject will

people

= 10.62,

know

(N. 1%) 0.77

with

0.53

your problems

0.57 0.55

over my feelings

ch~ot cmseprnws

0.x5

(social

rejection)

alpha

= 0.82

(6.2%)

your feehngs

0.47

you if you upset them

harm I’m

what

other people

if

0.72

I express

vulnerable

to attack

you are really

like,

SD = 3.27 is reverse

= 0.88

to yourself

control

understand

alpha

under control

Cronbach’\

don’t

my feelings

that the item

niprrs~ion

SD = 3.50

people

If I express

keep your

not to burden

~qucror 4: I think

I I. 23.

0.x I

Cronbach’s

I think

9.

0.81 0.81

my emotions

I.

4.

=0.X.5

upset

= 12.2 I SD = 4.60

Mean

alpha

fhottk upJ(//.S%)

sv/e

I don’t Mean

0.83 Cronbach’\

io.

17.

0.57

SD = 2.73

26.

ii.

I‘m

0.X6 0.82

your weaknesses

Fuc~ror 2: hrhoviouml When

of weakness

his or her weaknesses

I bottle up my feelings When I’m upset I uwally try to hide how I feel I seldom \how hoa I feelabout thing5 When I getupset I wally show how I feel (R)

5

(36.1%) 0.62

ix.

to wmeone

of wtwkne.ss)

(sign

is a sign of weakness

them

they will

0.75 0.57

think

less of you Cronbach’s

0.59 alpha

= 0.70

coded

that these subscales represent separate constructs. Mean scores and internal Cronbach’s alpha = 0.70) of each of the subscales are also shown in Table 2. Step 5: principal

components

analysis

reliability

(lowest

of subscales

The 4 subscales were positively associated (lowest r = 0.33, P -=c0.001) suggesting that there may be a higher order factor. In order to investigate this, a principal components analysis was carried out on the 4 subscales without specifying the number of factors to be extracted. One factor was extracted which had an eigenvalue of 2.36 and accounted for 59.1% of the variance. All 4 subscales loaded on this factor above 0.70. So, scores were summated from the 4 subscales to yield a total scale score (mean = 45.03, SD = 12.75). The internal reliability of the total scale was high (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.90) confirming the use of a single scale characterized as stoic attitudes, beliefs, and behaviour. No significant difference was found between males and females on any of the measures used in the study (largest t = - 1.61, NS) and no significant association was obtained between age and any of the measures used (largest Y= 0.09, NS). These variables were therefore excluded from further analysis. Step 6: convergent

validity with seeking support

Higher scores on the total 20-item attitudes towards emotional expression scale were associated with lower scores on the seeking social support scale (r = - 0.46, P -=c0.001). As it is possible that this association is due to concurrent emotional state, a regression was also computed with scores on the attitudes towards emotional expression scale and scores on the BDI and STAI-Y 1 entered on the same step to predict seeking social support. However, even with scores on the BDI and STAI-Y 1 partialled out, higher scores on the attitudes towards emotional expression scale remained associated with lower scores on the seeking social support scale (beta = - 0.53, P < 0.001). Higher scores on each of the subscales were associated with lower scores on the seeking support

874

STEPHEN

JOSEPH

rt d.

scale (lowest r = - 0.2 1. P < 0.01) although when entered together in a regression equation to predict scores on seeking social support only subscale 2-‘bottling up’-reached significance (beta = ~ 0.43, P < 0.001). This association remained significant even when scores on the BDI and the STAI-Y 1 were entered into the equation (beta = - 0.45, P < 0.001). ‘Bottling up’ can be thought of as a measure of behavioural coping style whereas the other subscales represent cognitions which might be thought to underlie behaviour. A regression of the three cognitive subscales to predict ‘bottling up’ accounted for 29% of the variance. The strongest association was with ‘keep in control’ (beta = 0.47, P < 0.00 1) and ‘social rejection’ (beta = 0.17, P < 0.03). No significant association was, however. found with ‘sign of weakness’ (1. = - 0.02, NS). it was found that higher scores on the 20-item attitudes towards emotional expression scale were associated with higher scores on the BDI (r = 0.28, P < 0.01) but not the STAI-Y 1 (1. = 0.13, NS). In order to examine subscale associations, the 4 subscale scores were entered together into a regression equation to predict scores on: (1) the BDI and (2) the STAI-Y 1; higher scores on the BDI were associated with higher scores on subscale I--‘sign ofweakness’ (beta = 0.20, P < 0.04) and subscale 4-‘social rejection’ (beta = 0.22. P < 0.02); and higher scores on the STAI-Y 1 were associated with higher scores on subscale 4-‘social rejection’ (beta = 0.22, P < 0.02). These data confirm that it may be useful to use the subscale scores as well as the total score to examine specilic relationships.

DISCUSSION

A 20-item measure of attitudes towards emotional expression was constructed and shown to have high internal reliability and convergent validity with the seeking social support scale even with concurrent emotional state partialled out. This is interesting as Pennebaker and his colleagues have proposed a theory of inhibition which suggests that the failure to confront traumatic events results in poorer health (Pennebaker, 1982; Pennebaker & Beall. 1986; Pennebaker rt ul., 1987). The central assumption is that inhibition of thoughts, feelings, and behaviour is an active process requiring physiological work. When individuals inhibit their need to talk about traumatic experiences and express their emotions, stress is placed on the body resulting in increased vulnerability to stress related diseases. It may be that these attitudes to emotional expression underlie a dispositional style towards inhibition. Further research could attempt to investigate this idea by investigating behavioural and physiological correlates of attitudes towards emotional expression under experimental conditions of disclosure. In addition, the scale was composed of 4 second order factors which appeared to have a differential association with the other measures. In line with current views that specific scales representing relatively pure measures of constructs explain more real world variance (e.g. Bollen, 1989: Marsh, 1992) we would recommend that subsequent research should focus on subscales as well as the overall scale. It is suggested that the 3 cognitive subscales underlie the behavioural subscale. However. further psychometric research with other populations is necessary to test the reliability and validity of the measure, especially concurrent validity with behavioural measures of inhibition. In conclusion, it has been suggested that attitudes towards emotional expression are involved in the development of psychological disorder following exposure to stressful life-events. The present study provides a brief self-report measure of attitudes towards emotional expression which might be useful in testing this prediction. REFERENCES Barnett, P. A. & Gotlib, 1. H. (198X). Psychosocial functioning and depression: Distinguishing among antecedents. concomitants, and consequences. Ps~chologicctl Bullrrin. 104, 97-l 26. Beck, A. T. ( 1967). Depression: Clinical. experimenfal. und theoretic4 nsprcts. New York: Harper and Row. Beck, A. T. & Emery, G. (1985). Anxiety disorders and phoDirr.s. A cognitil~r prrspectim,. NY: Basic Books. Beck, A., Rush. A.. Shaw, B. & Emery, G. t 1979). Cognitive therapy ofdepression: A treatment Monuc~l. New Yorh: Gurldlord Press. Beck, A., Ward, C., Mendelson. M., Mock, J. & Erbaugh, J. ( 1961 ). An inventory for measuring depression. Arc,lrrL’c,r of Genrrul Psychiutry, 4, 53-63. Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structrrrcrl equations uith krtent vcrriuhlr.7. New York: Wiley. Carver, C. S.. Scheier. M. F. & Weintraub, J. K. (1989). Assessing coping strategies: A theoretically ha\ed appt-oath. ./ouruo/ of‘Prr.sonmlit~ rend Socicrl P.sychology, 56. 267-283.

Attitudes

towards

emotional

expression

875

Dych, M. J. ( 1992). Subscales of the Dysfunctional Attitude Scale. Brifish Journal of Clinical Psychology. 31, 333-335. Dyck, M. & Stewart, B. (1991). Cognitive vulnerability to depression. Journal of Cognitive Ps.ychotherapy, 5, Il7-131. Endler. N. S. & Parker, J. D. A. ( 1990). Multidimensional assessment of coping: A critical evaluation. Journal ofPersonality und Socirrl Pqvholog~, 58, 844-854. Folkman. S. & Lazarus, R. S. (1988). Manual for the Ways of Coping Questionnaire: Research edition. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Haaga, D.. Dyck, M. & Ernst, D. (1991). Empirical status of cognitive theory of depression. Psychological BuUetin, 110. 215-236. Hollon, S. & Beck, A. (1979). Cognitive therapy of depression. In Kendall, P. & Hollon, S. (Eds), Cognitive-behavioura~ interverttion.s: TheotT. rrvenrch, and procedures (pp. 153-203). New York: Academic Press. Hollon. S. D., Kendall, P. C. & Lumry. A. (1986). Specificity of depressotypic cognitions in clinical depression. Journal of Ahnormcrl P.s~cholo,~~. 95, 52-59. Joseph. S.. Yule, W.. Williams, R. & Hodgkinson, P. (in press). Correlates of post traumatic stress at 30 months: The Herald of Free Enterprise disaster: Behaviour Research und Therapy. Marsh. H. W. (1992). Content specificity of relations between academic achievement and academic self-concept. Journal of EducutionaI P.~ychology, 84. 35-42. Pennebaker. J. W. ( 1982). The psychology ofphysical symptoms. New York: Springer Verlag. Pennebaker. J. W. & Beall. S. (I 986). Confronting a traumatic event: Toward an understanding of inhibition and disease. Journal of Ahnormtrl Psychology, 95, 274-28 I Pennebaker, J. W., Hughes, C. F. & O’Heeron, R. C. (1987). The psychophysiology of confession: Linking inhibitory and psychosomatic processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 781-793. Roger, D. & Najarian, B. (1989). The construction and validation of a new scale for measuring emotional control. Per.soncrlit> crnd fndividua[ DifSrrence.7, 10, 845-853. Sarason. B. R., Sarason, I. G. & Pierce, G. R. (Eds) (1990). Social support: An inferactional view. New York: Wiley. Spielberger, C. D., Gorsuch. R. L. & Lushene, R. E. (1970). Manual for the State Trait Anxiety Inventory. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Stevens, J. ( 1986). Applied multivariate statisrics for the social sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Weissman, A. & Beck, A. (1978). Development and validation of the Dysfunctional Attitude Scale. Paper presented at the Annutrl Meeting of the Association jbr the Advancement of Behaviour Therapy, Chicago, IL. Williams, R. (I 993). Towards a cognitive behavioural model for PTSD. Paper presented at a Meeting on Traumatic, Stress organised by the Northern Ireland Branch of the British Psychological Society, Belfast, N. Ireland. Williams, R., Hodgkinson. P., Joseph, S. & Yule, W. (1993). Attitudes towards emotion, social support and distress 30 months after the capsize of the Herald of FreeEnrerprise disaster. Paper presented at the 23rd European Congress of Behuviour trnd Cognitirv Therapies, Institute of Education, London. 22-25 September, 1993.