Real and virtual strange processes

Following notions of quantum mechanics as interpreted by the Copenhagen School, we make a distinction between measurements involving one or two virtual K mesons. New predictions result for the period of K oscillations at the Phi Factory

A systematic review of the relationship between generic and specific metacognitive beliefs and emotion dysregulation: A metacognitive model of emotion dysregulation

Although a probable association between metacognitive beliefs (also termed ‘metacognitions’) and emotion dysregulation has been suggested in the literature, the evidence is still sparse and inconclusive. The current study aims to present a comprehensive evaluation of the literature examining the association between metacognitive beliefs and emotion dysregulation. In accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) criteria, a search was conducted on PubMed and Ebsco. A manual search of reference lists was also run. Search terms were ‘metacognitions/metacognitive beliefs/positive metacognitive beliefs/negative metacognitive beliefs/cognitive self‐consciousness/beliefs about the need to control thoughts/cognitive confidence/negative beliefs about thoughts concerning uncontrollability and danger/AND difficulties emotion regulation/emotion dysregulation’. A total of 19 studies met the inclusion criteria. In both non‐clinical and clinical populations, a higher endorsement of dysfunctional metacognitive beliefs was found to be associated with emotion dysregulation and vice versa. A higher endorsement of metacognitive beliefs may be associated, either directly or via maladaptive forms of mental control (e.g., worry, rumination and suppression) to emotion dysregulation. Metacognitive beliefs could be the potential therapeutic target in clinical interventions aimed at reducing emotion regulation difficulties

Validating the Diathesis–Stress Model Based Case Conceptualization Procedure in Cognitive Behavioral Therapies: The LIBET (Life Themes and Semi-Adaptive Plans—Implications of Biased Beliefs, Elicitation and Treatment) Procedure

Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) approaches use case formulation procedures based on the diathesis–stress conceptualization model, arranged in two dimensions: emotional vulnerability (present in a patient’s consciousness in terms of core beliefs) and coping strategies. Nevertheless, despite its pivotal role, there are a limited number of validation studies for this model. Life themes and semi-adaptive plans: Implications of biased beliefs, elicitation and treatment (LIBET) is a CBT case formulation method grounded on the CBT diathesis–stress model that aims to help validate the CBT case formulation model, and, in particular, its bidimensional arrangement. In LIBET, the two classic CBT dimensions are called “life themes,” which are mental states of focused attention to emotional sensitivities represented as core beliefs in consciousness, and “semi-adaptive plans,” which are the rigid management strategies of “life themes” implemented by adopting coping strategies such as anxious safety behaviors, compulsive controls and aggressive or rewarding strategies. The study uses quantitative textual analysis to validate the LIBET procedure in a clinical sample. The investigation discusses the extent to which the results can be considered a validation of the arrangement of the general CBT diathesis–stress model in the two dimensions of core beliefs and coping strategies