Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T15:31:47.395Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparison of the Effects of Induced Muscle Tension Variations on Task Performance in Headache-prone and Non-headache Subjects

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 October 2014

Carmen C. Moran
Carmen C. Moran*
Affiliation:
Cumberland College of Health Sciences
*
Department of Behavioural Sciences, Cumberland College of Health Sciences, Lidcombe N.S.W. 2141
Get access

Abstract

Tension (muscle contraction) headache is often associated with high task demands, and relaxation is frequently recommended during daily work activities in many treatment programs. The effect of relaxation on concurrent task performance is assumed to be beneficial, or at worst to have no effect, but this assumption is seldom made explicit. This paper presents results from two experiments which have examined the effects of muscle tension and relaxation on concurrent task performance, in headache-prone and non-headache groups. Results indicated that induced frontalis relaxation did not generally result in optimal task performance; the performance measure affected (accuracy or reaction time) was related to the type of task being performed. Differences between the headache and non-headache subjects were especially related to interactions between task difficulty level and “optimal” level of frontalis tension. Further research is needed to clarify the aspects of performance most affected by variations in frontalis tension and the appropriateness of attempting to relax the frontalis muscle in task situations.

Type
Research Article
Information
Behaviour Change , Volume 4 , Issue 2 , June 1987 , pp. 14 - 19
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 1987

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Arena, J. G., Blanchard, E. B., Andrasik, F., Appelbaum, K. & Myers, P. E. (1985). Psychological comparisons of three kinds of headache subjects during and between headache states: Analysis of post-stress adaptation periods. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 29, 427–441.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bills, A. G. (1931). Blocking: A new principle of mental fatigue. American Journal of Psychology, 31, 230–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broadbent, D. E. (1971). Decision and stress. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Duffy, E. (1972). Activation. In Greenfield, N.S. & Sternbach, R. A. (Eds), Handbook of Psychophysiology. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Friedman, A. P. (1982). Psychophysiological aspects of headache. In Fann, W. E., Karacan, I., Pokorny, A. D. & Williams, R. L. (Eds), Phenomenology and treatment of psychological disorders. Jamaica, N.Y.: Spectrum.Google Scholar
Hays, W. L. (1970). Statistics. London: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Kennedy, J. L., & Travis, R. C. (1948). Prediction and control of alertness II: Continuous tracking. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 41, 203–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lance, J. W. (1982). Mechanisms and management of headache, (4th edn.) London: Butterworths.Google Scholar
Moran, C. C., & Cleary, P. J. (1984). Some benefits of high frontalis tension in tension headache sufferers. Headache, 24, 331–338.Google Scholar
Moran, C. C., & Cleary, P. J. (1986). The effects of frontalis tension level on choice-discrimination task accuracy and reaction time. Submitted to Perceptual and Motor Skills.Google Scholar
Philips, C. (1976). Headache and personality. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 20, 535–542.Google Scholar
Ratcliff, R. (1979). Group reaction time distributions and analysis of distribution statistics. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 446–461.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vickers, D., Caudrey, D., & Willson, R. (1971). Discriminating between the frequency of occurrence of two alternative events. Acta Psychologica, 35, 151–172.Google Scholar
Wolpe, J. (1984). Deconditioning and ad hoc uses of relaxation: An overview. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 15, 299–304.Google Scholar