Psychology & Health: Perfectionism and beliefs about emotions in adolescents with chronic fatigue syndrome and their parents (2019) Chalder et al.

Kalliope said:
I have read this part four times but still don't grasp what is being said here..

Holding unhelpful beliefs about emotions did not differ significantly across groups either, which was also contrary to expectations. This is different to findings in adults with CFS (Rimes et al., 2016; Rimes & Chalder, 2010), with unhelpful beliefs about emotions likely to lead to maladaptive emotion regulation strategies such as emotional suppression and somatising. However it has previously been found that adults with CFS report significantly more negative beliefs prior to CFS onset than after diagnosis (Brooks et al., 2017). Developing CFS may mean that an individual has to experience negative emotions from others (e.g. disappointment), which may have previously been avoided. This may lead to modification of their pre-existing beliefs about negative emotions being unacceptable or leading to rejection from others. The current study did not ask adolescents to rate their beliefs about emotions before CFS onset but this could be investigated in future research.
Click to expand...


Please spare us
 
Kalliope said:
gee, they're really nailing the patient blaming. so not having perfectionism is bad too?

A study of adults with CFS found that perfectionism post-diagnosis was not significantly different from healthy adults but their reports of premorbid perfectionism were significantly higher (Brooks et al., 2017). It is possible that people are forced to modify their perfectionism as a result of disabling CFS symptoms or that they choose to do so. In the present study, socially prescribed perfectionism, including perceived parental criticism and parental expectations, tended to be lower in the CFS group than in healthy controls. It may be that significant others have lowered their expectations in response to the CFS symptoms and impact, or this pattern may have been present premorbidly. Potentially, lower expectations could be an impediment to encouraging the processes that facilitate recovery from CFS, such as gradually and incrementally engaging in activities.
Click to expand...
Let's see: it is possible, it may be, may have, could be.

This is more speculative than astrology and of equal scientific value. I have second-degree cringe from the incompetence on display. Campfire drunks regularly manage more serious and meaningful discussion than this. It's completely reckless to allow this to be the standard of discourse for a disease as disabling as MS, something they don't even deny. Complete lunacy.
 
Kalliope said:
I have read this part four times but still don't grasp what is being said here..

Holding unhelpful beliefs about emotions did not differ significantly across groups either, which was also contrary to expectations. This is different to findings in adults with CFS (Rimes et al., 2016; Rimes & Chalder, 2010), with unhelpful beliefs about emotions likely to lead to maladaptive emotion regulation strategies such as emotional suppression and somatising. However it has previously been found that adults with CFS report significantly more negative beliefs prior to CFS onset than after diagnosis (Brooks et al., 2017). Developing CFS may mean that an individual has to experience negative emotions from others (e.g. disappointment), which may have previously been avoided. This may lead to modification of their pre-existing beliefs about negative emotions being unacceptable or leading to rejection from others. The current study did not ask adolescents to rate their beliefs about emotions before CFS onset but this could be investigated in future research.
Click to expand...
They're talking about beliefs as if it's something that can be measured in any standardized way. Who gives approval for nonsense like this? You can't measure "unhelpful beliefs" any more than you can measure chakra energy, vitality or whatever marketing terms used by alternative medicine. This is more bullshity than all the "toxins" talk used by proponents of purge diets.

What's next? Demonic possessions? Fairy blessings? Dragon energy? Might as well while they're wading deep in gobbledygook.
 
How many times do null results have to be spun as something else? ( and who on earth peer reviewed this)
How much money was spent on this study?
Sadly, combined with the recent safeguarding seminar this research is all heading on one direction. Where is Maya Duesberry ( apologies if spelling is wrong ) when you need her?
 
There's a whole trash bag of literature on perfectionism as relating to RA, IBS, depression etc.
It's honestly embarrassing.

Reading this grade school level thinking feels like being a starving person watching a grocery store throw out loads of perfectly good food. Surely money given out for this crap could find better use elsewhere.

And I have a question for anyone in the know. Are peer reviewers names supposed to be kept secret?
 
I think one gets the best overview of this paper by looking at the tables for double ** which indicates statistical significance (in this case p<0.01).

In the adolescent CFS patients, they tested 7 outcomes: seven subscales on questionnaires about perfectionism and beliefs about emotions. Only one showed a significant difference: CFS patients showed LOWER scores on parental representations than healthy controls and asthma patients. This means CFS patients gave lower scores to questions like: "My parents have expected excellence from me" or " I never felt like I could meet my parents' standards." The other 6 outcomes showed null results.

For the parents, 9 outcomes were tested, both for the father and the mother, so that makes 18 outcomes. Only one showed a significant difference: the father (but not the mother) of CFS patients showed LOWER scores on parental representations than parents of healthy controls and asthma patients. The other 17 outcomes showed null results.

Then they tested whether one of the 7 outcomes predicted fatigue and physical function of the adolescent patients at follow-up, three months later. None of these did, neither for fatigue or physical function (that's 14 times: no significant results were found).

So those were the findings. 37 of the 39 tested outcomes showed null results, on the other two CFS patients and their fathers showed fewer signs of perfectionism.
 
Mark Vink said:
2. So how on earth can they then conclude that "parental perfectionism and emotion regulation style may contribute to perfectionism in adolescents with CFS." As they just concluded that they did not suffer from perfectionism. Was the peer reviewer asleep?
Click to expand...
I think the authors (in a desperate attempt to pull something supportive of BPS theories out of the rubble of this study) found that perfectionist young people (with or without CFS) tended to have perfectionist mothers. (Table 4)

And they say one study found that depressed young people who are perfectionists tend to respond less well to treatments for depression.

And so they hypothesise that young people with CFS who are perfectionists might respond less well to the 'evidence-based treatments' that they keep on referring to. Because of course it can't be that the 'evidence-based treatments' don't actually work. There must be some personality fault (or many personality faults) of the sick people, and their parents, that explains why, despite the wonderful treatments, they don't get better.

And so
the study said:
Further research is required to establish whether high levels of perfectionism impact detrimentally on treatment outcome in CFS/ME.
Click to expand...

I find it incredible that any person making decisions about funding could read this study and think 'oh, yes, let's give these people more money'.
 
Last edited:
Has Chalder ever done any research that isn’t capable of being unpicked so easily? In OFSTED or CQC assessment terms her stuff must be at the unacceptable end of the scale. Or maybe there is a special Chalder Research Quality scale where as long as your name is Chalder your research is acceptable quality.
 
Michiel Tack said:
I think one gets the best overview of this paper by looking at the tables for double ** which indicates statistical significance (in this case p<0.01).

In the adolescent CFS patients, they tested 7 outcomes: seven subscales on questionnaires about perfectionism and beliefs about emotions. Only one showed a significant difference: CFS patients showed LOWER scores on parental representations than healthy controls and asthma patients. This means CFS patients gave lower scores to questions like: "My parents have expected excellence from me" or " I never felt like I could meet my parents' standards." The other 6 outcomes showed null results.

For the parents, 9 outcomes were tested, both for the father and the mother, so that makes 18 outcomes. Only one showed a significant difference: the father (but not the mother) of CFS patients showed LOWER scores on parental representations than parents of healthy controls and asthma patients. The other 17 outcomes showed null results.

Then they tested whether one of the 7 outcomes predicted fatigue and physical function of the adolescent patients at follow-up, three months later. None of these did, neither for fatigue or physical function (that's 14 times: no significant results were found).

So those were the findings. 37 of the 39 tested outcomes showed null results, on the other two CFS patients and their fathers showed fewer signs of perfectionism.
Click to expand...
It's laughable to claim p-values from a subjective questionnaire. It's like giving triple-floating point precision on a guesstimate. Forced precision like this is a big tell that angels dancing on a hairpin are being discussed.

This whole disease personality stuff is no more scientific than this joke self-help program from a movie:
tumblr_leefailgOd1qa1iiqo1_500.jpg


Whoever funded this garbage need to stop huffing glue and get a freaking grip on reality. This is blatant waste of funds in an area of research that is deliberately starved of even minimal funds. What a cruel joke.
 
I take it these researchers asked the adolescents what their parents' expectations of them are. Good choice to pick teens, as everyone knows this is a difficult age. What teen and parent relationship isn't a little, or a lot itchy scratchy? It seems to me this PS study is also biased because parents and teens often have conflicts - it's the nature of the beast.

Ask a teen how their parents treat them, and you may often get negative answers. Hey presto: mothers are a pain, demanding, perfectionistic etc.
 
Psychology departments in universities are very large and presumably bring in a lot of money. The studies are dirt cheap, you just need paper,pen and photocopies. Very different from the expense of a science laboratory.
 
obeat said:
Psychology departments in universities are very large and presumably bring in a lot of money. The studies are dirt cheap, you just need paper,pen and photocopies. Very different from the expense of a science laboratory.
Click to expand...


Good point. Publish or perish. Universities can apparently churn these things out - on the surface it looks good, as the wheel just keeps on turning. Looking busy must be good!?
 
obeat said:
Psychology departments in universities are very large and presumably bring in a lot of money. The studies are dirt cheap, you just need paper,pen and photocopies. Very different from the expense of a science laboratory.
Click to expand...
It’s one of the reasons I think it’s important for the ME/CFS community to try to raise money for biomedical research: there is likely to continue to be a number of cheap studies like these. And particularly when there are large gaps in the biomedical science, there will be psychologists, psychiatrists, etc. who will indulge in psychological speculation.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom