Multidimensional scaling reveals two dimensions of thermal pain

Psychological, cognitive factors and contextual influences in pain and pain-related suffering as revealed by a combined qualitative and quantitative assessment approach

Previous psychophysiological research suggests that pain measurement needs to go beyond the assessment of Pain Intensity and Unpleasantness by adding the evaluation of Pain-Related Suffering. Based on this three-dimensional approach, we attempted to elucidate who is more likely to suffer by identifying reasons that may lead individuals to report Pain and Pain-Related Suffering more than others. A sample of 24 healthy participants (age range 18-33) underwent four different sessions involving the evaluation of experimentally induced phasic and tonic pain. We applied two decision tree models to identify variables (selected from psychological questionnaires regarding pain and descriptors from post-session interviews) that provided a qualitative characterization of the degrees of Pain Intensity, Unpleasantness and Suffering and assessed the respective impact of contextual influences. The overall classification accuracy of the decision trees was 75% for Intensity, 77% for Unpleasantness and 78% for Pain-Related Suffering. The reporting of suffering was predominantly associated with fear of pain and active cognitive coping strategies, pain intensity with bodily competence conveying strength and resistance and unpleasantness with the degree of fear of pain and catastrophizing. These results indicate that the appraisal of the three pain dimensions was largely determined by stable psychological constructs. They also suggest that individuals manifesting higher active coping strategies may suffer less despite enhanced pain and those who fear pain may suffer even under low pain. The second decision tree model revealed that suffering did not depend on pain alone, but that the complex rating-related decision making can be shifted by situational factors (context, emotional and cognitive). The impact of coping and fear of pain on individual Pain-Related Suffering may highlight the importance of improving cognitive coping strategies in clinical settings.

The versatility of SpAM: a fast, efficient, spatial method of data collection for multidimensional scaling

Although traditional methods to collect similarity data (for multidimensional scaling [MDS]) are robust, they share a key shortcoming. Specifically, the possible pairwise comparisons in any set of objects grow rapidly as a function of set size. This leads to lengthy experimental protocols, or procedures that involve scaling stimulus subsets. We review existing methods of collecting similarity data, and critically examine the spatial arrangement method (SpAM) proposed by Goldstone (1994a), in which similarity ratings are obtained by presenting many stimuli at once. The participant moves stimuli around the computer screen, placing them at distances from one another that are proportional to subjective similarity. This provides a fast, efficient, and user-friendly method for obtaining MDS spaces. Participants gave similarity ratings to artificially constructed visual stimuli (comprising 2-3 perceptual dimensions) and nonvisual stimuli (animal names) with less-defined underlying dimensions. Ratings were obtained with 4 methods: pairwise comparisons, spatial arrangement, and 2 novel hybrid methods. We compared solutions from alternative methods to the pairwise method, finding that the SpAM produces high-quality MDS solutions. Monte Carlo simulations on degraded data suggest that the method is also robust to reductions in sample sizes and granularity. Moreover, coordinates derived from SpAM solutions accurately predicted discrimination among objects in same-different classification. We address the benefits of using a spatial medium to collect similarity measures.