@misc{PhilippKristonLanioetal.2019, author = {Philipp, Rebecca and Kriston, Levente and Lanio, Jana and K{\"u}hne, Franziska and H{\"a}rter, Martin and Moritz, Steffen and Meister, Ramona}, title = {Effectiveness of metacognitive interventions for mental disorders in adults-A systematic review and meta-analysis (METACOG)}, series = {Clinical psychology \& psychotherapy}, volume = {26}, journal = {Clinical psychology \& psychotherapy}, number = {2}, publisher = {Wiley}, address = {Hoboken}, issn = {1063-3995}, doi = {10.1002/cpp.2345}, pages = {227 -- 240}, year = {2019}, abstract = {We evaluated the effectiveness and acceptability of metacognitive interventions for mental disorders. We searched electronic databases and included randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials comparing metacognitive interventions with other treatments in adults with mental disorders. Primary effectiveness and acceptability outcomes were symptom severity and dropout, respectively. We performed random-effects meta-analyses. We identified Metacognitive Training (MCTrain), Metacognitive Therapy (MCTherap), and Metacognition Reflection and Insight Therapy (MERIT). We included 49 trials with 2,609 patients. In patients with schizophrenia, MCTrain was more effective than a psychological treatment (cognitive remediation, SMD = -0.39). It bordered significance when compared with standard or other psychological treatments. In a post hoc analysis, across all studies, the pooled effect was significant (SMD = -0.31). MCTrain was more effective than standard treatment in patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder (SMD = -0.40). MCTherap was more effective than a waitlist in patients with depression (SMD = -2.80), posttraumatic stress disorder (SMD = -2.36), and psychological treatments (cognitive-behavioural) in patients with anxiety (SMD = -0.46). In patients with depression, MCTherap was not superior to psychological treatment (cognitive-behavioural). For MERIT, the database was too small to allow solid conclusions. Acceptability of metacognitive interventions among patients was high on average. Methodological quality was mostly unclear or moderate. Metacognitive interventions are likely to be effective in alleviating symptom severity in mental disorders. Although their add-on value against existing psychological interventions awaits to be established, potential advantages are their low threshold and economy.}, language = {en} } @article{PhilippKristonKuehneetal.2020, author = {Philipp, Rebecca and Kriston, Levente and K{\"u}hne, Franziska and Harter, Martin and Meister, Ramona}, title = {Concepts of metacognition in the treatment of patients with mental disorders}, series = {Journal of rational emotive and cognitive behavior therapy}, volume = {38}, journal = {Journal of rational emotive and cognitive behavior therapy}, number = {2}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {New York, NY}, issn = {0894-9085}, doi = {10.1007/s10942-019-00333-3}, pages = {173 -- 183}, year = {2020}, abstract = {While metacognitive interventions are gaining attention in the treatment of various mental disorders, a review of the literature showed that the term is often defined poorly and used for a variety of psychotherapeutic approaches that do not necessarily pursue the same goal. We give a summary of three metacognitive interventions which were developed within a sound theoretical framework-metacognitive therapy, metacognitive training, and metacognitively-oriented integrative psychotherapies-and discuss their similarities and distinctive features. We then offer an integrative operational definition of metacognitive interventions as goal-oriented treatments that target metacognitive content, which is characterized by the awareness and understanding of one's own thoughts and feelings as well as the thoughts and feelings of others. They aim to alleviate disorder-specific and individual symptoms by gaining more flexibility in cognitive processing.}, language = {en} } @book{KellerRotherBartkowiaketal.2018, author = {Keller, Henry and Rother, Philipp and Bartkowiak, Michael and Rauch, Sebastian and Zehl, Rebecca and Ballentin, Josefine and K{\"a}hler, Claudia and Appelt, Franziska and Kochan, Robert and Pfitzner, Tom and Rogge, Lisa and Kurth, Anne-Kathrin and Hiller, Chris}, title = {Geographien des Fußballs}, editor = {Wilhelm, Jan Lorenz}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam}, address = {Potsdam}, isbn = {978-3-86956-416-6}, issn = {2194-1599}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-401497}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {231}, year = {2018}, abstract = {In Deutschland erscheint Fußball als omnipr{\"a}sent: Fußballprofis gelten als Vorbilder und Werbetr{\"a}ger, Fußballvereine fungieren als regionale und teilweise als globale Wirtschaftsunternehmen, Fußballspiele als gesellschaftliche Ereignisse und Fußballmannschaften - sowohl auf regionaler als auch auf nationaler Ebene - als identit{\"a}tsstiftend. Unbestritten weist das Ph{\"a}nomen Fußball eine große Gesellschaftsrelevanz auf, und so verwundert es nicht, dass es als Gegenstand wissenschaftlicher und eben auch geographischer Abhandlungen fungiert. Der vorliegende Band richtet sich nun an Geographiestudenten und Fußballinteressierte, die sich verwundert fragen m{\"o}gen, was Geographien des Fußballs bedeuten k{\"o}nnte. Der Band veranschaulicht exemplarisch, was geographische Perspektiven auf den Forschungsgegenstand Fußball auszeichnen und welche Themenfelder und Fragestellungen sich f{\"u}r eine Erforschung anbieten. Dabei reicht das in diesem Band vorgestellte Themenspektrum von raumbezogenen Sprachcodierungen in Spielanalysen {\"u}ber Stadionatmosph{\"a}re und Fanidentit{\"a}ten bis hin zu medial erzeugten Unsicherheitsr{\"a}umen.}, language = {de} } @article{BondueRichter2016, author = {Bond{\"u}, Rebecca and Richter, Philipp}, title = {Interrelations of Justice, Rejection, Provocation, and Moral Disgust Sensitivity and Their Links with the Hostile Attribution Bias, Trait Anger, and Aggression}, series = {Frontiers in psychology}, volume = {7}, journal = {Frontiers in psychology}, publisher = {Frontiers Research Foundation}, address = {Lausanne}, issn = {1664-1078}, doi = {10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00795}, pages = {15}, year = {2016}, abstract = {Several personality dispositions with common features capturing sensitivities to negative social cues have recently been introduced into psychological research. To date, however, little is known about their interrelations, their conjoint effects on behavior, or their interplay with other risk factors. We asked N = 349 adults from Germany to rate their justice, rejection, moral disgust, and provocation sensitivity, hostile attribution bias, trait anger, and forms and functions of aggression. The sensitivity measures were mostly positively correlated; particularly those with an egoistic focus, such as victim justice, rejection, and provocation sensitivity, hostile attributions and trait anger as well as those with an altruistic focus, such as observer justice, perpetrator justice, and moral disgust sensitivity. The sensitivity measures had independent and differential effects on forms and functions of aggression when considered simultaneously and when controlling for hostile attributions and anger. They could not be integrated into a single factor of interpersonal sensitivity or reduced to other well-known risk factors for aggression. The sensitivity measures, therefore, require consideration in predicting and preventing aggression.}, language = {en} } @article{BondueRichter2016, author = {Bond{\"u}, Rebecca and Richter, Philipp}, title = {Linking Forms and Functions of Aggression in Adults to Justice and Rejection Sensitivity}, series = {Psychology of violence}, volume = {6}, journal = {Psychology of violence}, publisher = {American Psychological Association}, address = {Washington}, issn = {2152-0828}, doi = {10.1037/a0039200}, pages = {292 -- 302}, year = {2016}, abstract = {Objective: Research has linked individual differences in justice and rejection sensitivity to aggression in different age groups. However, different forms and functions of aggression have not been considered when investigating these links in adults. Furthermore, no attention has been paid to verbal aggression or the conjoint effects of justice and rejection sensitivity. Method: The present study assessed rejection sensitivity as well as victim, observer, and perpetrator justice sensitivity in 349 German adults. Links with self-reported forms (physical, relational, verbal) and functions (proactive, reactive) of aggression were examined. Results: In structural equation models controlling for age and gender, higher victim sensitivity predicted higher relational, proactive, and reactive aggression and higher observer sensitivity predicted higher physical and verbal aggression. In contrast, higher perpetrator sensitivity predicted lower physical, relational, verbal, and proactive aggression. Higher rejection sensitivity predicted higher physical and reactive, but lower verbal aggression. Using a 2-dimensional definition of aggression considering forms and functions of aggression at the same time yielded similar results. There were marked gender differences. Conclusion: Justice and rejection sensitivity may explain individual differences in forms and functions of aggression in adults and should therefore be considered in the planning of preventive and intervention measures.}, language = {en} } @misc{BondueRichter2016, author = {Bond{\"u}, Rebecca and Richter, Philipp}, title = {Interrelations of justice, rejection, provocation, and moral disgust sensitivity and their links with the hostile attribution bias, trait anger, and aggression}, series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe}, journal = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe}, number = {446}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-407697}, pages = {15}, year = {2016}, abstract = {Several personality dispositions with common features capturing sensitivities to negative social cues have recently been introduced into psychological research. To date, however, little is known about their interrelations, their conjoint effects on behavior, or their interplay with other risk factors. We asked N = 349 adults from Germany to rate their justice, rejection, moral disgust, and provocation sensitivity, hostile attribution bias, trait anger, and forms and functions of aggression. The sensitivity measures were mostly positively correlated; particularly those with an egoistic focus, such as victim justice, rejection, and provocation sensitivity, hostile attributions and trait anger as well as those with an altruistic focus, such as observer justice, perpetrator justice, and moral disgust sensitivity. The sensitivity measures had independent and differential effects on forms and functions of aggression when considered simultaneously and when controlling for hostile attributions and anger. They could not be integrated into a single factor of interpersonal sensitivity or reduced to other well-known risk factors for aggression. The sensitivity measures, therefore, require consideration in predicting and preventing aggression.}, language = {en} }