<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE ArticleSet PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD PubMed 2.7//EN" "https://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/ncbi/pubmed/in/PubMed.dtd">
<ArticleSet>
<Article>
<Journal>
				<PublisherName>University of Isfahan</PublisherName>
				<JournalTitle>Research in Cognitive and Behavioral Sciences</JournalTitle>
				<Issn>2251-7642</Issn>
				<Volume>14</Volume>
				<Issue>1</Issue>
				<PubDate PubStatus="epublish">
					<Year>2024</Year>
					<Month>08</Month>
					<Day>22</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</Journal>
<ArticleTitle>Research in Cognitive and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 14, Issue 1, No. 26, Spring and Summer 2024</ArticleTitle>
<VernacularTitle>Research in Cognitive and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 14, Issue 1, No. 26, Spring and Summer 2024</VernacularTitle>
			<FirstPage></FirstPage>
			<LastPage></LastPage>
			<ELocationID EIdType="pii">29387</ELocationID>
			
<ELocationID EIdType="doi">10.22108/cbs.2024.29387</ELocationID>
			
			<Language>FA</Language>
<AuthorList>
</AuthorList>
				<PublicationType>Journal Article</PublicationType>
			<History>
				<PubDate PubStatus="received">
					<Year>2025</Year>
					<Month>03</Month>
					<Day>18</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</History>
		<Abstract></Abstract>
			<OtherAbstract Language="FA"></OtherAbstract>
<ArchiveCopySource DocType="pdf">https://cbs.ui.ac.ir/article_29387_940283c09d32d457ec6d9745fe1d4492.pdf</ArchiveCopySource>
</Article>

<Article>
<Journal>
				<PublisherName>University of Isfahan</PublisherName>
				<JournalTitle>Research in Cognitive and Behavioral Sciences</JournalTitle>
				<Issn>2251-7642</Issn>
				<Volume>14</Volume>
				<Issue>1</Issue>
				<PubDate PubStatus="epublish">
					<Year>2024</Year>
					<Month>08</Month>
					<Day>22</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</Journal>
<ArticleTitle>Effectiveness of Self-determination Training Program on Social Self-efficacy in Adolescents with Visual Impairment</ArticleTitle>
<VernacularTitle>Effectiveness of Self-determination Training Program on Social Self-efficacy in Adolescents with Visual Impairment</VernacularTitle>
			<FirstPage>1</FirstPage>
			<LastPage>20</LastPage>
			<ELocationID EIdType="pii">29094</ELocationID>
			
<ELocationID EIdType="doi">10.22108/cbs.2024.141982.1906</ELocationID>
			
			<Language>FA</Language>
<AuthorList>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Razieh</FirstName>
					<LastName>Ghanbari  Sheikh Shabani</LastName>
<Affiliation>MA. student of Psychology and Education of People with Special Needs, Faculty of Education and Psychology, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran.</Affiliation>
<Identifier Source="ORCID">0009-0009-6147-3470</Identifier>

</Author>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Mohammad</FirstName>
					<LastName>Ashori</LastName>
<Affiliation>Associate Professor, Department of Psychology and Education of People with Special Needs, Faculty of Education and Psychology, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran.</Affiliation>

</Author>
</AuthorList>
				<PublicationType>Journal Article</PublicationType>
			<History>
				<PubDate PubStatus="received">
					<Year>2024</Year>
					<Month>06</Month>
					<Day>28</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</History>
		<Abstract>The present research aimed to investigate the effectiveness of self-determination training on social self-efficacy in adolescents with visual impairment. This research was conducted using a semi-experimental method and a pre-test-post-test design with a control group. The statistical population included all adolescents with visual impairment in Isfahan City. The sample included 30 adolescents with visual impairment from Tawakkul Rehabilitation Center and Shahid Abedi School, who were selected using the convenience method. They were randomly divided into two groups with ten people in each group. To measure social self-efficacy, Connolly’s Adolescents Social Self-Efficacy Scale (1989) was used. The experimental group participated in the self-determination training program in 10 sessions of 60 minutes, while the control group did not participate in this program. The data were analyzed using multivariate analysis of covariance. The results showed the positive and significant impact of intervention on social self-efficacy and their subscales in adolescents with visual impairment (&lt;em&gt;p&lt;/em&gt;&lt;0.01). Based on the results, self-determination through strengthening participation and decision-making improves adolescents’ social self-efficacy, and this program can be used in schools and special centers for adolescents with visual impairment.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Introduction&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Visual impairment has a significant impact on the psychological, educational, social, and economic experiences of each individual (Anley et al., 2022). Students with visual impairment face major challenges for active participation in family life, social interaction, interpersonal relationships, and leisure activities (Hallahan et al., 2023). These students may experience higher levels of anxiety and stress due to transportation problems, dependence on others, and daily life problems (Braakman &amp; Sterkenburg, 2023). In general, they are challenged not only with problems caused by their visual impairment but also with specific problems of adolescence such as self-efficacy (Scally &amp; Lord, 2019).&lt;br /&gt;Compared to their sighted peers, people with severe visual impairment strive less for self-efficacy and have less motivation for social interaction (Stribing et al, 2022). Considering that various factors such as motivation, rational belief, effective communication, self-management, and appropriate training affect the social self-efficacy of adolescents with visual impairment, the correction and improvement of these factors requires different educational and therapeutic methods and programs, such as self-determination training (Ashori, 2023). Self-determination is a theory in the field of human motivation that has evolved in terms of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation (Guay, 2022), and has many applications in fields such as personal growth, well-being, health, parenting, and education (Deci et al., 2017). Therefore, the main problem of the current study was to investigate the effect of self-determination training on social self-efficacy in adolescents with visual impairment.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Method&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The current research is a semi-experimental type with a pre-test and post-test design with a control group. The statistical population included all adolescents with visual impairment aged 12 to 15 in Isfahan City in the academic year of 2022-2023. The research sample consisted of 20 people who were selected by the convenience sampling method from Tawakkul Rehabilitation Center and Shahid Abedi School and were replaced by a random method in an experimental group and a control group of 10 people. Connolly’s Adolescents Social Self-Efficacy Scale (1989) was used to evaluate both groups and their score was considered as a pre-test.&lt;br /&gt;The self-determination training program was implemented during 10 sessions of 60 minutes and 2 sessions per week for the experimental group, while the control group did not participate in this program. Both experimental and control groups were evaluated using the same Adolescents Social Self-Efficacy Scale after the implementation of the self-determination training program, and their score was considered as a post-test. Data were analyzed using univariate and multivariate analysis of covariance in SPSS 26 software.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;To investigate the effectiveness of self-determination training on social self-efficacy in adolescents with visual impairment, univariate covariance analysis was used, the results of which are reported in Table 1.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Table 1. &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Univariate analysis of covariance of the total score of&lt;/em&gt;&lt;em&gt; &lt;/em&gt;&lt;em&gt;social self-efficacy&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Source&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;SS&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;df&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;MS&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;F&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Sig.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Eta&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Test power&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Pre-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;6245.68&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;6245.68&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1354.04&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.98&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.00&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;150.90&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;150.90&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;32.73&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.61&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.94&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Error&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;78.41&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;17&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;4.61&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Total&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;146279.00&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;20&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;According to the results of Table 1, it can be said that self-determination training had a positive and significant effect on the social self-efficacy of adolescents with visual impairment. According to the eta coefficient, it can be said that 61 percent of the change in the social self-efficacy of these adolescents comes from self-determination training. To determine the effectiveness of self-determination training on the subscales of social assertiveness, performance in social situations, participation in a group or social activity, aspects of friendship and intimacy, and helping or receiving help in adolescents with visual impairment, the statistical test of multivariate covariance analysis was used, the results of which are reported in Table 2.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Table 2.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;em&gt; Univariate analysis of covariance of social self-efficacy subscales&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Source of group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;SS&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;df&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;MS&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;F&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Sig.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Eta&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Test power&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Social assertiveness&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;22.93&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;22.93&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;5.71&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.036&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.37&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.86&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Performance in social situations&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;41.94&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;41.94&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;14.97&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.65&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.00&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Participation in a group or social activity&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;68.33&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;68.33&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;21.02&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.71&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.00&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Aspects of friendship and intimacy&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;59.12&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;59.12&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;12.60&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.64&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.00&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Helping or receiving help&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;96.38&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;96.38&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;22.94&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.72&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.00&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The results of Table 2 show that the effect of the intervention on all subscales is significant. Based on the eta coefficient, it can be stated that 37, 65, 71, 64, and 72 percent of the change in the scores of social assertiveness, performance in social situations, participation in a group or social activity, aspects of friendship and intimacy, and helping or receiving help, respectively.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Discussion&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The results showed that self-determination training had a significant effect on improving the social self-efficacy of adolescents with visual impairment. Teaching self-determination skills helps people to have a rational view of their own and other people&#039;s conditions and to become more aware of their abilities (Hallahan et al., 2023). On the other hand, self-determination training was able to help people better understand self-management and problem-solving by creating effective communication between them and increasing individual motivation to increase their self-efficacy (Guay, 2022). Therefore, it is possible that this cycle has helped to improve social self-efficacy in adolescents with visual impairment, and it seems that teaching self-determination skills is useful and effective.&lt;br /&gt;The current study had a number of limitations. For example, the present study was conducted only on adolescents with visual impairment in centers and schools of Isfahan City. In addition, the sample size was relatively small. Therefore, an available sampling method was used. The lack of a follow-up phase was another limitation of the present study. It is suggested to conduct a follow-up test in future studies. Another suggestion is to use a random method for sampling. In different schools, self-determination program training can be used for adolescents and adults to strengthen their social .self-efficacy</Abstract>
			<OtherAbstract Language="FA">The present research aimed to investigate the effectiveness of self-determination training on social self-efficacy in adolescents with visual impairment. This research was conducted using a semi-experimental method and a pre-test-post-test design with a control group. The statistical population included all adolescents with visual impairment in Isfahan City. The sample included 30 adolescents with visual impairment from Tawakkul Rehabilitation Center and Shahid Abedi School, who were selected using the convenience method. They were randomly divided into two groups with ten people in each group. To measure social self-efficacy, Connolly’s Adolescents Social Self-Efficacy Scale (1989) was used. The experimental group participated in the self-determination training program in 10 sessions of 60 minutes, while the control group did not participate in this program. The data were analyzed using multivariate analysis of covariance. The results showed the positive and significant impact of intervention on social self-efficacy and their subscales in adolescents with visual impairment (&lt;em&gt;p&lt;/em&gt;&lt;0.01). Based on the results, self-determination through strengthening participation and decision-making improves adolescents’ social self-efficacy, and this program can be used in schools and special centers for adolescents with visual impairment.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Introduction&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Visual impairment has a significant impact on the psychological, educational, social, and economic experiences of each individual (Anley et al., 2022). Students with visual impairment face major challenges for active participation in family life, social interaction, interpersonal relationships, and leisure activities (Hallahan et al., 2023). These students may experience higher levels of anxiety and stress due to transportation problems, dependence on others, and daily life problems (Braakman &amp; Sterkenburg, 2023). In general, they are challenged not only with problems caused by their visual impairment but also with specific problems of adolescence such as self-efficacy (Scally &amp; Lord, 2019).&lt;br /&gt;Compared to their sighted peers, people with severe visual impairment strive less for self-efficacy and have less motivation for social interaction (Stribing et al, 2022). Considering that various factors such as motivation, rational belief, effective communication, self-management, and appropriate training affect the social self-efficacy of adolescents with visual impairment, the correction and improvement of these factors requires different educational and therapeutic methods and programs, such as self-determination training (Ashori, 2023). Self-determination is a theory in the field of human motivation that has evolved in terms of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation (Guay, 2022), and has many applications in fields such as personal growth, well-being, health, parenting, and education (Deci et al., 2017). Therefore, the main problem of the current study was to investigate the effect of self-determination training on social self-efficacy in adolescents with visual impairment.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Method&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The current research is a semi-experimental type with a pre-test and post-test design with a control group. The statistical population included all adolescents with visual impairment aged 12 to 15 in Isfahan City in the academic year of 2022-2023. The research sample consisted of 20 people who were selected by the convenience sampling method from Tawakkul Rehabilitation Center and Shahid Abedi School and were replaced by a random method in an experimental group and a control group of 10 people. Connolly’s Adolescents Social Self-Efficacy Scale (1989) was used to evaluate both groups and their score was considered as a pre-test.&lt;br /&gt;The self-determination training program was implemented during 10 sessions of 60 minutes and 2 sessions per week for the experimental group, while the control group did not participate in this program. Both experimental and control groups were evaluated using the same Adolescents Social Self-Efficacy Scale after the implementation of the self-determination training program, and their score was considered as a post-test. Data were analyzed using univariate and multivariate analysis of covariance in SPSS 26 software.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;To investigate the effectiveness of self-determination training on social self-efficacy in adolescents with visual impairment, univariate covariance analysis was used, the results of which are reported in Table 1.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Table 1. &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Univariate analysis of covariance of the total score of&lt;/em&gt;&lt;em&gt; &lt;/em&gt;&lt;em&gt;social self-efficacy&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Source&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;SS&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;df&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;MS&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;F&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Sig.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Eta&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Test power&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Pre-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;6245.68&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;6245.68&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1354.04&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.98&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.00&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;150.90&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;150.90&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;32.73&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.61&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.94&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Error&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;78.41&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;17&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;4.61&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Total&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;146279.00&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;20&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;According to the results of Table 1, it can be said that self-determination training had a positive and significant effect on the social self-efficacy of adolescents with visual impairment. According to the eta coefficient, it can be said that 61 percent of the change in the social self-efficacy of these adolescents comes from self-determination training. To determine the effectiveness of self-determination training on the subscales of social assertiveness, performance in social situations, participation in a group or social activity, aspects of friendship and intimacy, and helping or receiving help in adolescents with visual impairment, the statistical test of multivariate covariance analysis was used, the results of which are reported in Table 2.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Table 2.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;em&gt; Univariate analysis of covariance of social self-efficacy subscales&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Source of group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;SS&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;df&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;MS&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;F&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Sig.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Eta&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Test power&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Social assertiveness&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;22.93&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;22.93&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;5.71&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.036&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.37&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.86&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Performance in social situations&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;41.94&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;41.94&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;14.97&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.65&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.00&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Participation in a group or social activity&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;68.33&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;68.33&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;21.02&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.71&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.00&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Aspects of friendship and intimacy&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;59.12&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;59.12&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;12.60&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.64&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.00&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Helping or receiving help&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;96.38&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;96.38&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;22.94&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.72&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.00&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The results of Table 2 show that the effect of the intervention on all subscales is significant. Based on the eta coefficient, it can be stated that 37, 65, 71, 64, and 72 percent of the change in the scores of social assertiveness, performance in social situations, participation in a group or social activity, aspects of friendship and intimacy, and helping or receiving help, respectively.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Discussion&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The results showed that self-determination training had a significant effect on improving the social self-efficacy of adolescents with visual impairment. Teaching self-determination skills helps people to have a rational view of their own and other people&#039;s conditions and to become more aware of their abilities (Hallahan et al., 2023). On the other hand, self-determination training was able to help people better understand self-management and problem-solving by creating effective communication between them and increasing individual motivation to increase their self-efficacy (Guay, 2022). Therefore, it is possible that this cycle has helped to improve social self-efficacy in adolescents with visual impairment, and it seems that teaching self-determination skills is useful and effective.&lt;br /&gt;The current study had a number of limitations. For example, the present study was conducted only on adolescents with visual impairment in centers and schools of Isfahan City. In addition, the sample size was relatively small. Therefore, an available sampling method was used. The lack of a follow-up phase was another limitation of the present study. It is suggested to conduct a follow-up test in future studies. Another suggestion is to use a random method for sampling. In different schools, self-determination program training can be used for adolescents and adults to strengthen their social .self-efficacy</OtherAbstract>
		<ObjectList>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Self-determination</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Self-efficacy</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">visual impairment</Param>
			</Object>
		</ObjectList>
<ArchiveCopySource DocType="pdf">https://cbs.ui.ac.ir/article_29094_c96a0cfbea17b643db1ac5a63981d8f7.pdf</ArchiveCopySource>
</Article>

<Article>
<Journal>
				<PublisherName>University of Isfahan</PublisherName>
				<JournalTitle>Research in Cognitive and Behavioral Sciences</JournalTitle>
				<Issn>2251-7642</Issn>
				<Volume>14</Volume>
				<Issue>1</Issue>
				<PubDate PubStatus="epublish">
					<Year>2024</Year>
					<Month>08</Month>
					<Day>22</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</Journal>
<ArticleTitle>Effects of Computer-Assisted Working Memory Training Programme on Working Memory Ability and Mathematical Performance of  Children at Risk of Mathematical Learning Difficulties</ArticleTitle>
<VernacularTitle>Effects of Computer-Assisted Working Memory Training Programme on Working Memory Ability and Mathematical Performance of  Children at Risk of Mathematical Learning Difficulties</VernacularTitle>
			<FirstPage>21</FirstPage>
			<LastPage>42</LastPage>
			<ELocationID EIdType="pii">29135</ELocationID>
			
<ELocationID EIdType="doi">10.22108/cbs.2025.143184.1951</ELocationID>
			
			<Language>FA</Language>
<AuthorList>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Kamyar</FirstName>
					<LastName>Azimi</LastName>
<Affiliation>Ph.D. in Educational Psychology, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran.</Affiliation>

</Author>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Manijeh</FirstName>
					<LastName>Shehniyailagh</LastName>
<Affiliation>Professor in the Department of Psychology, Faculty of Education and Psychology, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran.</Affiliation>

</Author>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Alireza</FirstName>
					<LastName>Hajiyakhchali</LastName>
<Affiliation>Associate Professor in the Department of Psychology, Faculty of Education and Psychology, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran.       :</Affiliation>

</Author>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Maneli</FirstName>
					<LastName>Shehni Karamzadeh</LastName>
<Affiliation>General Physician in Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran.</Affiliation>

</Author>
</AuthorList>
				<PublicationType>Journal Article</PublicationType>
			<History>
				<PubDate PubStatus="received">
					<Year>2024</Year>
					<Month>10</Month>
					<Day>26</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</History>
		<Abstract>Working memory is an important domain-general cognitive that can impair the ability to remember and use mathematical concepts and procedures in children at risk of mathematical learning difficulties. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of a computer-assisted working memory training programme on the working memory ability and mathematical performance of children at risk of mathematical learning difficulties. The research method utilized in this study was a field experiment with a pre-test, post-test, and follow-up design with a control group. The participants were 30 first-grade children from 12 elementary schools in Kuhdasht City, who were randomly assigned to an experimental group (n = 15) and a control group (n = 15). Children were assessed using a variety of measures, including the Number Sense Brief Screener, Number Knowledge Test, Raven&#039;s Colored Progressive Matrices Test, Child Symptom Inventory, and Working Memory Index of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC-V), and Number Sets Test. The computer-assisted working memory training programme was conducted three times a week for six weeks. Results showed a significant improvement in both working memory (&lt;em&gt;p&lt;/em&gt; = .002) and mathematical performance (&lt;em&gt;p&lt;/em&gt; = .0001) of the control group compared to the control group in post-test and follow-up phase. Findings show that working memory training can enhance working memory in children at risk of mathematical learning difficulties (near transfer) and help optimize these children&#039;s mathematical performance potential (far transfer).&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Introduction&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Research has demonstrated the academic benefits of working memory training in typically developing preschool and kindergarten children (Honore &amp; Noel, 2017), those with attention and working memory deficits (Bergman-Nutley &amp; Klingberg, 2014), and children with math dyscalculia in the later years of elementary school (Layes et al., 2018). However, the benefits of implementing cognitive intervention programs, including working memory training, for first-grade children at risk of mathematical learning difficulties are still unclear. So far, only one study has investigated this issue internationally (Munez et al., 2022). Additionally, very few empirical studies include follow-up evaluations. Most importantly, it is uncertain whether the positive effects observed in laboratory settings can be replicated in real-world learning environments. Therefore, the present study aimed to determine the effects of near and far transfer of working memory training on working memory ability and mathematical performance of children at risk of mathematical learning difficulties in the first grade of elementary school in an educational setting.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Method&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The current study is a field experiment utilizing a pre-test, post-test, and follow-up design with a control group. The participants were 30 first-grade children from 12 elementary schools in Kuhdasht city, who were randomly assigned to an experimental group (n = 15) and a control group (n = 15). Children were assessed using a variety of measures, including the Number Sense Brief Screener (Jordan et al., 2010), Number Knowledge Test (Griffin, 2010), Raven&#039;s Colored Progressive Matrices Test (Raven et al., 1998), Child Symptom Inventory (Gadow &amp; Sprafkin, 1994), Working Memory Index of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC-V, Groth-Marnat &amp; Wright, 2016), and Number Sets Test (Geary et al., 2009). The computer-assisted working memory training programme was conducted three times a week for six weeks. Data were analyzed using AMOS (version 24) and SPSS (version 26) programs.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Findings&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The descriptive data for the control and the experimental groups is discussed. In Table 1 the descriptive data for the experimental group and the control group for all measures on the pre-, post-, and follow- up tests are presented. At the pre-test, there were significant differences on visual working memory and mathematical performance between the groups in favor of the control group.&lt;br /&gt;Table 1. Means and standard deviations of the test scores on the pre-, post-, and follow-up tests for the experimental group (n = 15) and the control group (n = 15)&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Experimental group&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Control group&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;M&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;SD&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;M&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;SD&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pre-test&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Working memory&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;19.87&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;4.48&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;20.67&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;3.14&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Mathematical performance&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;3.30&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.01&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;3.41&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.83&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Post-test&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Working memory&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;28.09&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;3.50&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;23.52&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;3.15&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Mathematical performance&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;5.04&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.85&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;3.63&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.21&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Follow-test&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Working memory&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;26.19&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;3.90&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;23.05&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;3.47&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Mathematical performance&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;4.87&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.04&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;3.48&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.94&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;The MANCOVA results indicated that the experimental and control groups differed significantly in at least one of the dependent variables. This conclusion is based on the findings from the Wilks&#039; Lambda test conducted during both the post-test (&lt;em&gt;F&lt;/em&gt;(2,25) = 7.89, &lt;em&gt;p&lt;/em&gt; = .002) and follow-up (&lt;em&gt;F&lt;/em&gt;(2,25) = 18.62, &lt;em&gt;p&lt;/em&gt; = .0001) stages. To determine this difference, an ANCOVA within a MANCOVA was conducted on the post-test and follow-up scores of the dependent variables. The results showed that the F values of the ANCOVA for working memory ability and mathematical performance in both the post-test (&lt;em&gt;F&lt;/em&gt;(1.26) = 12.06, &lt;em&gt;p&lt;/em&gt; = ./002, &lt;em&gt;F&lt;/em&gt;(1.26) = 7.84, &lt;em&gt;p&lt;/em&gt; = .009) and follow-up phases (&lt;em&gt;F&lt;/em&gt;(1.26) = 25.09, &lt;em&gt;p&lt;/em&gt; = .0001, &lt;em&gt;F&lt;/em&gt;(1.26) = 9.81, &lt;em&gt;p&lt;/em&gt; = .004) were statistically significant.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Discussion and Conclusion&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The results indicated that after adjusting for pre-test scores, a group of children who underwent working memory training, experienced a significant increase in their working memory abilities (near transfer effects) and mathematical performance (far transfer effects) compared to the control group. This improvement was observed in both the post-test and follow-up assessments. These encouraging findings are consistent with previous research on children with typical development, low socioeconomic status, and disabilities (Honore &amp; Noel, 2017; Munez et al., 2022). The limitations of this study include a relatively small sample size and the use of an inactive control group. Researchers should consider examining and replicating the results of this study with a larger sample size across various schools, potentially nationwide, and including an active control group. In summary, the computer-assisted working memory training programme can effectively improve the working memory abilities and mathematical performance of children at risk of mathematical learning difficulties in school and classroom settings.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;</Abstract>
			<OtherAbstract Language="FA">Working memory is an important domain-general cognitive that can impair the ability to remember and use mathematical concepts and procedures in children at risk of mathematical learning difficulties. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of a computer-assisted working memory training programme on the working memory ability and mathematical performance of children at risk of mathematical learning difficulties. The research method utilized in this study was a field experiment with a pre-test, post-test, and follow-up design with a control group. The participants were 30 first-grade children from 12 elementary schools in Kuhdasht City, who were randomly assigned to an experimental group (n = 15) and a control group (n = 15). Children were assessed using a variety of measures, including the Number Sense Brief Screener, Number Knowledge Test, Raven&#039;s Colored Progressive Matrices Test, Child Symptom Inventory, and Working Memory Index of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC-V), and Number Sets Test. The computer-assisted working memory training programme was conducted three times a week for six weeks. Results showed a significant improvement in both working memory (&lt;em&gt;p&lt;/em&gt; = .002) and mathematical performance (&lt;em&gt;p&lt;/em&gt; = .0001) of the control group compared to the control group in post-test and follow-up phase. Findings show that working memory training can enhance working memory in children at risk of mathematical learning difficulties (near transfer) and help optimize these children&#039;s mathematical performance potential (far transfer).&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Introduction&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Research has demonstrated the academic benefits of working memory training in typically developing preschool and kindergarten children (Honore &amp; Noel, 2017), those with attention and working memory deficits (Bergman-Nutley &amp; Klingberg, 2014), and children with math dyscalculia in the later years of elementary school (Layes et al., 2018). However, the benefits of implementing cognitive intervention programs, including working memory training, for first-grade children at risk of mathematical learning difficulties are still unclear. So far, only one study has investigated this issue internationally (Munez et al., 2022). Additionally, very few empirical studies include follow-up evaluations. Most importantly, it is uncertain whether the positive effects observed in laboratory settings can be replicated in real-world learning environments. Therefore, the present study aimed to determine the effects of near and far transfer of working memory training on working memory ability and mathematical performance of children at risk of mathematical learning difficulties in the first grade of elementary school in an educational setting.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Method&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The current study is a field experiment utilizing a pre-test, post-test, and follow-up design with a control group. The participants were 30 first-grade children from 12 elementary schools in Kuhdasht city, who were randomly assigned to an experimental group (n = 15) and a control group (n = 15). Children were assessed using a variety of measures, including the Number Sense Brief Screener (Jordan et al., 2010), Number Knowledge Test (Griffin, 2010), Raven&#039;s Colored Progressive Matrices Test (Raven et al., 1998), Child Symptom Inventory (Gadow &amp; Sprafkin, 1994), Working Memory Index of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC-V, Groth-Marnat &amp; Wright, 2016), and Number Sets Test (Geary et al., 2009). The computer-assisted working memory training programme was conducted three times a week for six weeks. Data were analyzed using AMOS (version 24) and SPSS (version 26) programs.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Findings&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The descriptive data for the control and the experimental groups is discussed. In Table 1 the descriptive data for the experimental group and the control group for all measures on the pre-, post-, and follow- up tests are presented. At the pre-test, there were significant differences on visual working memory and mathematical performance between the groups in favor of the control group.&lt;br /&gt;Table 1. Means and standard deviations of the test scores on the pre-, post-, and follow-up tests for the experimental group (n = 15) and the control group (n = 15)&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Experimental group&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Control group&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;M&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;SD&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;M&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;SD&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pre-test&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Working memory&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;19.87&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;4.48&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;20.67&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;3.14&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Mathematical performance&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;3.30&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.01&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;3.41&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.83&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Post-test&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Working memory&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;28.09&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;3.50&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;23.52&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;3.15&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Mathematical performance&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;5.04&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.85&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;3.63&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.21&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Follow-test&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Working memory&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;26.19&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;3.90&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;23.05&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;3.47&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Mathematical performance&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;4.87&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.04&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;3.48&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.94&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;The MANCOVA results indicated that the experimental and control groups differed significantly in at least one of the dependent variables. This conclusion is based on the findings from the Wilks&#039; Lambda test conducted during both the post-test (&lt;em&gt;F&lt;/em&gt;(2,25) = 7.89, &lt;em&gt;p&lt;/em&gt; = .002) and follow-up (&lt;em&gt;F&lt;/em&gt;(2,25) = 18.62, &lt;em&gt;p&lt;/em&gt; = .0001) stages. To determine this difference, an ANCOVA within a MANCOVA was conducted on the post-test and follow-up scores of the dependent variables. The results showed that the F values of the ANCOVA for working memory ability and mathematical performance in both the post-test (&lt;em&gt;F&lt;/em&gt;(1.26) = 12.06, &lt;em&gt;p&lt;/em&gt; = ./002, &lt;em&gt;F&lt;/em&gt;(1.26) = 7.84, &lt;em&gt;p&lt;/em&gt; = .009) and follow-up phases (&lt;em&gt;F&lt;/em&gt;(1.26) = 25.09, &lt;em&gt;p&lt;/em&gt; = .0001, &lt;em&gt;F&lt;/em&gt;(1.26) = 9.81, &lt;em&gt;p&lt;/em&gt; = .004) were statistically significant.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Discussion and Conclusion&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The results indicated that after adjusting for pre-test scores, a group of children who underwent working memory training, experienced a significant increase in their working memory abilities (near transfer effects) and mathematical performance (far transfer effects) compared to the control group. This improvement was observed in both the post-test and follow-up assessments. These encouraging findings are consistent with previous research on children with typical development, low socioeconomic status, and disabilities (Honore &amp; Noel, 2017; Munez et al., 2022). The limitations of this study include a relatively small sample size and the use of an inactive control group. Researchers should consider examining and replicating the results of this study with a larger sample size across various schools, potentially nationwide, and including an active control group. In summary, the computer-assisted working memory training programme can effectively improve the working memory abilities and mathematical performance of children at risk of mathematical learning difficulties in school and classroom settings.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;</OtherAbstract>
		<ObjectList>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Working memory programme</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Working Memory</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">mathematical performance</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Mathematical learning difficulties</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">elementary school</Param>
			</Object>
		</ObjectList>
<ArchiveCopySource DocType="pdf">https://cbs.ui.ac.ir/article_29135_9ef4ea6f579eff1a20d4308fed858daf.pdf</ArchiveCopySource>
</Article>

<Article>
<Journal>
				<PublisherName>University of Isfahan</PublisherName>
				<JournalTitle>Research in Cognitive and Behavioral Sciences</JournalTitle>
				<Issn>2251-7642</Issn>
				<Volume>14</Volume>
				<Issue>1</Issue>
				<PubDate PubStatus="epublish">
					<Year>2024</Year>
					<Month>08</Month>
					<Day>22</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</Journal>
<ArticleTitle>Investigate the role of individual and environmental factors in decision-making regarding normative and informational influences</ArticleTitle>
<VernacularTitle>Investigate the role of individual and environmental factors in decision-making regarding normative and informational influences</VernacularTitle>
			<FirstPage>43</FirstPage>
			<LastPage>62</LastPage>
			<ELocationID EIdType="pii">29172</ELocationID>
			
<ELocationID EIdType="doi">10.22108/cbs.2025.142839.1936</ELocationID>
			
			<Language>FA</Language>
<AuthorList>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Neda</FirstName>
					<LastName>Ghaemi</LastName>
<Affiliation>Ph.D Student of Cognitive Neuroscience, Department of Cognitive Neuroscience, Institute for Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran.</Affiliation>

</Author>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Fatemeh</FirstName>
					<LastName>Bakouie</LastName>
<Affiliation>Assistant Professor, Department of Cognitive Modeling, Institute for Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran.</Affiliation>

</Author>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Khatereh</FirstName>
					<LastName>Borhani</LastName>
<Affiliation>Assistant Professor, Department of Cognitive Neuroscience, Institute for Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran.</Affiliation>
<Identifier Source="ORCID">0000-0001-7936-2669</Identifier>

</Author>
</AuthorList>
				<PublicationType>Journal Article</PublicationType>
			<History>
				<PubDate PubStatus="received">
					<Year>2024</Year>
					<Month>09</Month>
					<Day>18</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</History>
		<Abstract>The current research investigated the role of individual and environmental factors in decision-making regarding normative and informational influences. The sample consisted of 50 university students (M&lt;sub&gt;age&lt;/sub&gt;= 22.5; SD= 3.5) selected using the available sampling method. An experimental task was used to evaluate the social influence on individuals&#039; decision-making by considering two major causes of influence: normative and informational. In addition, the five personality traits questionnaire (NEO) was utilized to evaluate the role of individuals’ personalities on social influence. The T-test, the generalized linear regression model, and the Pearson correlation coefficient were used for statistical analyses. The results showed that, in general, there is no significant difference between the extent to which normative and informational influences impact individuals during decision-making. Moreover, Informational influence increases with the increasing ambiguity of decision-making conditions (&lt;em&gt;p &lt;/em&gt;&lt; .01). Negative opinions of others (&lt;em&gt;p &lt;/em&gt;&lt; .001) cause normative influence and change in people&#039;s opinions more than their positive opinions. Further, the higher the openness the lesser the extent to which people are influenced by normative factors (&lt;em&gt;p &lt;/em&gt;= .04). It is suggested that to influence people&#039;s decisions, individual and environmental factors that affect decision-making, such as the degree of difficulty of decision-making, the feedback provided to change their opinion, and their personality, be considered.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Introduction&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Social influence refers to the phenomenon in which an individual&#039;s behaviors, opinions, or beliefs change due to their interactions, often becoming similar to those of the people they interact with (Sweet &amp; Adhikari, 2020). Social influence can cause individuals to converge their behavior and decisions toward the majority opinion of society (Oyebode &amp; Nicholls, 2023). Conformity is a type of social influence and refers to changing one&#039;s behavior to match the responses of others (Cialdini &amp; Goldstein, 2004). Deutsch and colleagues (1955) proposed two causes of being influenced by others: normative influence and informational influence (Deutsch &amp; Gerard, 1955). Conformity due to informational influence occurs when an individual accepts another&#039;s viewpoint because they believe others are more knowledgeable about the situation. Conformity resulting from normative influence refers to an individual&#039;s adherence to the positive expectations of others to be liked and accepted by them (Stallen &amp; Sanfey, 2015). In this study, in order to examine the role of individual and environmental factors affecting normative and informational influences, variables such as age and personality traits were evaluated as individual factors, and variables such as task type and conditions were considered environmental factors.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Method&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;An experimental method was used for the research. Fifty participants (19 female and 31 male) were selected using the convenience sampling method in the 18 to 34 age range (M&lt;sub&gt;age&lt;/sub&gt;= 22.5; SD= 3.5). Two behavioral tasks were used to evaluate normative and informational influences. The first task was to measure the informational influence, which was presented as a perceptual color identification task (Germar &amp; Mojzisch, 2019). The second task was a judgmental task for assessing the attractiveness of paintings to measure normative influence (Liuzza et al., 2019). Revisions were the excluded measures in these tasks that were compared via t-tests.&lt;br /&gt;In order to evaluate the relationship between personality traits and the degree of conformity of individuals, the NEO personality questionnaire (five-factor questionnaire) was used. This questionnaire consists of 60 questions and measures five personality traits including neuroticism, openness, agreeableness, conscientiousness, and extraversion (Costa &amp; McCrae, 2014). To evaluate the relationship between age and personality traits with the level of conformity, a generalized linear model (GLM) was used.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;By analyzing both tasks, it was observed that 86 per cent of the participants revised their choice at least once according to the majority opinion. During the first task, 82 per cent of participants conformed to the majority opinion at least once, while 76 per cent did so in the second task. There was no significant difference in conformity between individuals under normative and informational influence, and people conformed to both causes in almost equal proportions.&lt;br /&gt;Examining the degree of conformity in the second task with independent variables showed a significant negative relationship between openness and conformity (&lt;em&gt;p &lt;/em&gt;= 0.04, t = -2.10). Given that the second task measures normative influence, a high score of openness in a person reduces his conformity under normative influence.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Conclusion&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The results indicate that one factor influencing decision-making is the degree of ambiguity and difficulty of the available issue. The more ambiguous and challenging the issue, the stronger the tendency for individuals to conform to others. Another key factor is the fear of being judged; people often follow others’ choices, even in personal matters. Fear of judgment (normative influence) and the desire to make the right choice based on information (informational influence) contribute to conformity in nearly equal measure. Furthermore, the study reveals that negative preferences and judgments exert a stronger impact on conformity and response changes under normative influence than positive preferences and judgments. Regarding the influence of individual factors on conformity, the findings show that individuals who are high in openness (those who seek new experiences) are less influenced by norms. They are less concerned about others&#039; judgments when making decisions. The implications of this study are far-reaching, particularly for individuals aiming to persuade others. Policymakers, consultants, speakers, and marketers can leverage both normative and informational influences to enhance their effectiveness in shaping opinions and decisions.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;</Abstract>
			<OtherAbstract Language="FA">The current research investigated the role of individual and environmental factors in decision-making regarding normative and informational influences. The sample consisted of 50 university students (M&lt;sub&gt;age&lt;/sub&gt;= 22.5; SD= 3.5) selected using the available sampling method. An experimental task was used to evaluate the social influence on individuals&#039; decision-making by considering two major causes of influence: normative and informational. In addition, the five personality traits questionnaire (NEO) was utilized to evaluate the role of individuals’ personalities on social influence. The T-test, the generalized linear regression model, and the Pearson correlation coefficient were used for statistical analyses. The results showed that, in general, there is no significant difference between the extent to which normative and informational influences impact individuals during decision-making. Moreover, Informational influence increases with the increasing ambiguity of decision-making conditions (&lt;em&gt;p &lt;/em&gt;&lt; .01). Negative opinions of others (&lt;em&gt;p &lt;/em&gt;&lt; .001) cause normative influence and change in people&#039;s opinions more than their positive opinions. Further, the higher the openness the lesser the extent to which people are influenced by normative factors (&lt;em&gt;p &lt;/em&gt;= .04). It is suggested that to influence people&#039;s decisions, individual and environmental factors that affect decision-making, such as the degree of difficulty of decision-making, the feedback provided to change their opinion, and their personality, be considered.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Introduction&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Social influence refers to the phenomenon in which an individual&#039;s behaviors, opinions, or beliefs change due to their interactions, often becoming similar to those of the people they interact with (Sweet &amp; Adhikari, 2020). Social influence can cause individuals to converge their behavior and decisions toward the majority opinion of society (Oyebode &amp; Nicholls, 2023). Conformity is a type of social influence and refers to changing one&#039;s behavior to match the responses of others (Cialdini &amp; Goldstein, 2004). Deutsch and colleagues (1955) proposed two causes of being influenced by others: normative influence and informational influence (Deutsch &amp; Gerard, 1955). Conformity due to informational influence occurs when an individual accepts another&#039;s viewpoint because they believe others are more knowledgeable about the situation. Conformity resulting from normative influence refers to an individual&#039;s adherence to the positive expectations of others to be liked and accepted by them (Stallen &amp; Sanfey, 2015). In this study, in order to examine the role of individual and environmental factors affecting normative and informational influences, variables such as age and personality traits were evaluated as individual factors, and variables such as task type and conditions were considered environmental factors.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Method&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;An experimental method was used for the research. Fifty participants (19 female and 31 male) were selected using the convenience sampling method in the 18 to 34 age range (M&lt;sub&gt;age&lt;/sub&gt;= 22.5; SD= 3.5). Two behavioral tasks were used to evaluate normative and informational influences. The first task was to measure the informational influence, which was presented as a perceptual color identification task (Germar &amp; Mojzisch, 2019). The second task was a judgmental task for assessing the attractiveness of paintings to measure normative influence (Liuzza et al., 2019). Revisions were the excluded measures in these tasks that were compared via t-tests.&lt;br /&gt;In order to evaluate the relationship between personality traits and the degree of conformity of individuals, the NEO personality questionnaire (five-factor questionnaire) was used. This questionnaire consists of 60 questions and measures five personality traits including neuroticism, openness, agreeableness, conscientiousness, and extraversion (Costa &amp; McCrae, 2014). To evaluate the relationship between age and personality traits with the level of conformity, a generalized linear model (GLM) was used.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;By analyzing both tasks, it was observed that 86 per cent of the participants revised their choice at least once according to the majority opinion. During the first task, 82 per cent of participants conformed to the majority opinion at least once, while 76 per cent did so in the second task. There was no significant difference in conformity between individuals under normative and informational influence, and people conformed to both causes in almost equal proportions.&lt;br /&gt;Examining the degree of conformity in the second task with independent variables showed a significant negative relationship between openness and conformity (&lt;em&gt;p &lt;/em&gt;= 0.04, t = -2.10). Given that the second task measures normative influence, a high score of openness in a person reduces his conformity under normative influence.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Conclusion&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The results indicate that one factor influencing decision-making is the degree of ambiguity and difficulty of the available issue. The more ambiguous and challenging the issue, the stronger the tendency for individuals to conform to others. Another key factor is the fear of being judged; people often follow others’ choices, even in personal matters. Fear of judgment (normative influence) and the desire to make the right choice based on information (informational influence) contribute to conformity in nearly equal measure. Furthermore, the study reveals that negative preferences and judgments exert a stronger impact on conformity and response changes under normative influence than positive preferences and judgments. Regarding the influence of individual factors on conformity, the findings show that individuals who are high in openness (those who seek new experiences) are less influenced by norms. They are less concerned about others&#039; judgments when making decisions. The implications of this study are far-reaching, particularly for individuals aiming to persuade others. Policymakers, consultants, speakers, and marketers can leverage both normative and informational influences to enhance their effectiveness in shaping opinions and decisions.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;</OtherAbstract>
		<ObjectList>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Conformity</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Normative Influence</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Informational Influence</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">personality traits</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Decision-Making</Param>
			</Object>
		</ObjectList>
<ArchiveCopySource DocType="pdf">https://cbs.ui.ac.ir/article_29172_e09ba0971079d1f7fcac34a9619db962.pdf</ArchiveCopySource>
</Article>

<Article>
<Journal>
				<PublisherName>University of Isfahan</PublisherName>
				<JournalTitle>Research in Cognitive and Behavioral Sciences</JournalTitle>
				<Issn>2251-7642</Issn>
				<Volume>14</Volume>
				<Issue>1</Issue>
				<PubDate PubStatus="epublish">
					<Year>2024</Year>
					<Month>08</Month>
					<Day>22</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</Journal>
<ArticleTitle>Standardization of epistemic trust/mistrust/credulity questionnaire: Examining validity and reliability among adolescents
Standardization of ETMCQ among adolescents</ArticleTitle>
<VernacularTitle>Standardization of epistemic trust/mistrust/credulity questionnaire: Examining validity and reliability among adolescents
Standardization of ETMCQ among adolescents</VernacularTitle>
			<FirstPage>63</FirstPage>
			<LastPage>82</LastPage>
			<ELocationID EIdType="pii">29121</ELocationID>
			
<ELocationID EIdType="doi">10.22108/cbs.2024.140504.1887</ELocationID>
			
			<Language>FA</Language>
<AuthorList>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Raziyeh</FirstName>
					<LastName>Hashemi</LastName>
<Affiliation>Ph. D Student of Clinical Psychology, Faculty of Education and Psychology, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran.</Affiliation>

</Author>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Mehdi Reza</FirstName>
					<LastName>Sarafraz</LastName>
<Affiliation>Associate Professor of Clinical Psychology, Faculty of Education and Psychology, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran.</Affiliation>

</Author>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Habib</FirstName>
					<LastName>Hadian Fard</LastName>
<Affiliation>Professor of Clinical Psychology, Faculty of Education and Psychology, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran.</Affiliation>

</Author>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Mohammad Reza</FirstName>
					<LastName>Taghavi</LastName>
<Affiliation>Professor of Clinical Psychology, Faculty of Education and Psychology, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran.</Affiliation>

</Author>
</AuthorList>
				<PublicationType>Journal Article</PublicationType>
			<History>
				<PubDate PubStatus="received">
					<Year>2024</Year>
					<Month>03</Month>
					<Day>10</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</History>
		<Abstract>Epistemic trust means validating and fitting information that comes from others and has relationships with pathological and therapeutic factors. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the psychometric properties of the Persian version of the Trust/Distrust/Epistemic Validity Questionnaire (ETMCQ) in the general population. In the first study, 510 Participants, and in the second one, 310 Participants aged 14 to 63 years old were selected by snowball sampling. The Participants of the first study answered the EMCTQ scale and demographic characteristics (age, gender, level of education) on the online platform of Porsal, and in the second study, they answered the EMCTQ and attachment scale, reflective performance, psychological safety, and general self-efficacy. The results of this study showed that the three-factor model of trust/mistrust/credulity in exploratory factor analysis and confirmation has a favorable fit. Cronbach&#039;s alpha coefficient was higher than 0.70 and was satisfactory; The test-retest coefficient of this questionnaire after three months intervals was 0.69 to 0.80. Correlation coefficients showed that scores of confidence/distrust/epistemic validity have a positive and significant relationship with general self-efficacy and reflexive performance. This relationship represents the convergent validity of the scale. The factor structure, reliability, and reliability of the epistemic trust/mistrust/credulity questionnaire for research applications and clinical diagnosis are acceptable and it can be said that the questionnaire is a useful and valid tool for conducting research related to epistemic trust in different areas of the relationship.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Introduction&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;One of the prerequisites for optimal interpersonal functioning is the capacity for mentalization (Fonagy et al., 1991; Frith, 1989) , which is closely related to concepts such as emotion recognition and trust (Bateman &amp; Fonagy, 2016) . In recent years, Fonagy and Allison (2014), drawing on the findings of the Natural Knowledge Transfer Theory by Csibra and Gergely (2009)  and the concept of Epistemic vigilance (Sperber et al., 2010),  defined a construct called &quot;epistemic trust,&quot; which is considered the core mechanism for the transfer of interpersonal information and is closely linked to attachment (Fonagy &amp; Allison, 2014). The lack of epistemic trust leads to difficulties in mentalization and an inability to learn from others in an interpersonal context (Campbell et al., 2021). Epistemic trust means considering information received from others as meaningful, relevant to oneself, and generalizable to other situations (Campbell et al., 2021). Given the importance of cognitive trust in pathology and treatment and the lack of a standardized empirical tool in Iran, the standardization of this scale in the Iranian adolescent population could contribute to future research in this area.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;method&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The research population consisted of all adolescents with borderline personality traits in Shiraz City, both male and female, aged between 14 and 23 years. Participants were selected through snowball sampling method. The questionnaire link was sent to 310 students via mobile phone. Then the collected data were analyzed in SPSS 22 software.&lt;br /&gt;Before the implementation, the Epistemic Trust Mistrust Credulity Questionnaire was translated into Persian by the authors and then independently translated back into English by a separate translator. No significant qualitative differences were observed between the two English versions. Data were then collected through the Porsall platform (https://panel.porsall.com/Research/MyResearches). In the first part of the study, participants were asked to complete the EMCTQ questionnaire along with social-demographic questions (age, gender, education level). In the second part, additional self-report scales were administered to examine the relationship between ETMCQ scores and reflective performance, experiences of close relationships (attachment), childhood trauma, and general self-efficacy.&lt;br /&gt;This study used the Reflective Functioning Questionnaire (RFQ), Adult Attachment Styles Questionnaire, General Self-Efficacy Questionnaire, and Childhood Trauma Questionnaire (CTQ).&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In phase one, 530 participants responded to the ETMCQ questionnaire (Study 1, n = 530), consisting of 273 women (51.51%) and 257 men (48.5%), with ages ranging from 14 to 62 years (M = 26.47, SD = 12.88). After conducting exploratory factor analysis, three factors were extracted from the entire questionnaire, which explained 50.65% of the total variance of the scale. The eigenvalues for the factors of gullibility, trust, and distrust were 4.04, 3.59, and 2.19, respectively.&lt;br /&gt;In phase two, 310 participants, aged between 14-23 years (89 participants, 28.7%, were between 14-18 years), participated, with 151 male participants (48.7%) and 159 female participants (51.3%). Examining the three-factor structure of the Epistemic Trust Questionnaire, confirmatory factor analysis was performed, with results shown in the table below.&lt;br /&gt;The value of X&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;/df and RMSEA indices are 86.2 and 0.078 respectively. Internal consistency results, using Cronbach&#039;s alpha method, were as follows: for the subscales of trust, mistrust, and credulity, the values were 0.97, 0.96, and 0.96, respectively, indicating good reliability of the instrument.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Discussion&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The results of the study indicate that with higher educational levels, epistemic credulity decreases. This may be due to the reinforcement and teaching of critical thinking in higher education, as well as the reduction of mental health symptoms in older age groups (Steptoe et al., 2015). There was no significant difference in epistemic trust between men and women, which may suggest that gender does not have an impact on cognitive positioning (Liotti et al., 2021) .&lt;br /&gt;Epistemic trust has a positive and significant relationship with self-efficacy and reflective performance. This significance is rooted in the close connection between epistemic trust and mentalization, as confirmed in previous studies (Fonagy et al., 2018; Jurist, 2018; Jurist, 2005; Jurist et al., 2008). The positive relationship between epistemic trust and general self-efficacy originates from an individual&#039;s ability to acquire information in interpersonal relationships, particularly when their epistemic trust is high (Bateman &amp; Fonagy, 2008; Campbell et al., 2021; Fonagy et al., 2018). Additionally, epistemic trust has a negative and significant relationship with childhood trauma, low mentalization, and (Liotti, 2019) insecure attachment (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt; &lt; 0.05).&lt;br /&gt;A negative and significant relationship exists between epistemic mistrust and both self-efficacy and reflective performance, while epistemic mistrust has a positive and significant relationship with childhood trauma and insecure attachment. When individuals experience difficulty in their childhood, they tend to struggle with trusting others (Knox, 2016; Luyten et al., 2020) .They may also find it hard to reduce their epistemic vigilance and view others as supportive (Liotti, 2019; Liotti et al., 2021; Oehlman Forbes et al., 2021). Anxious and ambivalent attachment styles are significant factors contributing to disrupted trust in relationships and are positively correlated with epistemic mistrust. That is because, theoretically, individuals with damaged attachment styles are less reliant on others, rigid, and inflexible, which reduces their capacity for acquiring new information (Bateman &amp; Fonagy, 2008; Fonagy et al., 2017; Fonagy et al., 2018).&lt;br /&gt;Epistemic credulity decreases with increasing educational levels, which is attributed to the enhancement of critical thinking in higher education (Campbell et al., 2021). Epistemic credulity has a positive and significant relationship with childhood trauma and insecure attachment, which is theoretically justified by the close link between the domains of attachment and epistemic trust (Bo et al., 2017; Campbell et al., 2021; Koenig &amp; Harris, 2007). Epistemic credulity and epistemic mistrust have a positive relationship with insecure attachment (Bo et al., 2017). The negative relationship between epistemic credulity and self-efficacy arises from the fact that individuals with lower self-efficacy tend to have less agency, trust others&#039; opinions and the analyses of situations more, and overlook their own agency when analyzing issues (Sherer et al., 1982).&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; </Abstract>
			<OtherAbstract Language="FA">Epistemic trust means validating and fitting information that comes from others and has relationships with pathological and therapeutic factors. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the psychometric properties of the Persian version of the Trust/Distrust/Epistemic Validity Questionnaire (ETMCQ) in the general population. In the first study, 510 Participants, and in the second one, 310 Participants aged 14 to 63 years old were selected by snowball sampling. The Participants of the first study answered the EMCTQ scale and demographic characteristics (age, gender, level of education) on the online platform of Porsal, and in the second study, they answered the EMCTQ and attachment scale, reflective performance, psychological safety, and general self-efficacy. The results of this study showed that the three-factor model of trust/mistrust/credulity in exploratory factor analysis and confirmation has a favorable fit. Cronbach&#039;s alpha coefficient was higher than 0.70 and was satisfactory; The test-retest coefficient of this questionnaire after three months intervals was 0.69 to 0.80. Correlation coefficients showed that scores of confidence/distrust/epistemic validity have a positive and significant relationship with general self-efficacy and reflexive performance. This relationship represents the convergent validity of the scale. The factor structure, reliability, and reliability of the epistemic trust/mistrust/credulity questionnaire for research applications and clinical diagnosis are acceptable and it can be said that the questionnaire is a useful and valid tool for conducting research related to epistemic trust in different areas of the relationship.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Introduction&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;One of the prerequisites for optimal interpersonal functioning is the capacity for mentalization (Fonagy et al., 1991; Frith, 1989) , which is closely related to concepts such as emotion recognition and trust (Bateman &amp; Fonagy, 2016) . In recent years, Fonagy and Allison (2014), drawing on the findings of the Natural Knowledge Transfer Theory by Csibra and Gergely (2009)  and the concept of Epistemic vigilance (Sperber et al., 2010),  defined a construct called &quot;epistemic trust,&quot; which is considered the core mechanism for the transfer of interpersonal information and is closely linked to attachment (Fonagy &amp; Allison, 2014). The lack of epistemic trust leads to difficulties in mentalization and an inability to learn from others in an interpersonal context (Campbell et al., 2021). Epistemic trust means considering information received from others as meaningful, relevant to oneself, and generalizable to other situations (Campbell et al., 2021). Given the importance of cognitive trust in pathology and treatment and the lack of a standardized empirical tool in Iran, the standardization of this scale in the Iranian adolescent population could contribute to future research in this area.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;method&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The research population consisted of all adolescents with borderline personality traits in Shiraz City, both male and female, aged between 14 and 23 years. Participants were selected through snowball sampling method. The questionnaire link was sent to 310 students via mobile phone. Then the collected data were analyzed in SPSS 22 software.&lt;br /&gt;Before the implementation, the Epistemic Trust Mistrust Credulity Questionnaire was translated into Persian by the authors and then independently translated back into English by a separate translator. No significant qualitative differences were observed between the two English versions. Data were then collected through the Porsall platform (https://panel.porsall.com/Research/MyResearches). In the first part of the study, participants were asked to complete the EMCTQ questionnaire along with social-demographic questions (age, gender, education level). In the second part, additional self-report scales were administered to examine the relationship between ETMCQ scores and reflective performance, experiences of close relationships (attachment), childhood trauma, and general self-efficacy.&lt;br /&gt;This study used the Reflective Functioning Questionnaire (RFQ), Adult Attachment Styles Questionnaire, General Self-Efficacy Questionnaire, and Childhood Trauma Questionnaire (CTQ).&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In phase one, 530 participants responded to the ETMCQ questionnaire (Study 1, n = 530), consisting of 273 women (51.51%) and 257 men (48.5%), with ages ranging from 14 to 62 years (M = 26.47, SD = 12.88). After conducting exploratory factor analysis, three factors were extracted from the entire questionnaire, which explained 50.65% of the total variance of the scale. The eigenvalues for the factors of gullibility, trust, and distrust were 4.04, 3.59, and 2.19, respectively.&lt;br /&gt;In phase two, 310 participants, aged between 14-23 years (89 participants, 28.7%, were between 14-18 years), participated, with 151 male participants (48.7%) and 159 female participants (51.3%). Examining the three-factor structure of the Epistemic Trust Questionnaire, confirmatory factor analysis was performed, with results shown in the table below.&lt;br /&gt;The value of X&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;/df and RMSEA indices are 86.2 and 0.078 respectively. Internal consistency results, using Cronbach&#039;s alpha method, were as follows: for the subscales of trust, mistrust, and credulity, the values were 0.97, 0.96, and 0.96, respectively, indicating good reliability of the instrument.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Discussion&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The results of the study indicate that with higher educational levels, epistemic credulity decreases. This may be due to the reinforcement and teaching of critical thinking in higher education, as well as the reduction of mental health symptoms in older age groups (Steptoe et al., 2015). There was no significant difference in epistemic trust between men and women, which may suggest that gender does not have an impact on cognitive positioning (Liotti et al., 2021) .&lt;br /&gt;Epistemic trust has a positive and significant relationship with self-efficacy and reflective performance. This significance is rooted in the close connection between epistemic trust and mentalization, as confirmed in previous studies (Fonagy et al., 2018; Jurist, 2018; Jurist, 2005; Jurist et al., 2008). The positive relationship between epistemic trust and general self-efficacy originates from an individual&#039;s ability to acquire information in interpersonal relationships, particularly when their epistemic trust is high (Bateman &amp; Fonagy, 2008; Campbell et al., 2021; Fonagy et al., 2018). Additionally, epistemic trust has a negative and significant relationship with childhood trauma, low mentalization, and (Liotti, 2019) insecure attachment (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt; &lt; 0.05).&lt;br /&gt;A negative and significant relationship exists between epistemic mistrust and both self-efficacy and reflective performance, while epistemic mistrust has a positive and significant relationship with childhood trauma and insecure attachment. When individuals experience difficulty in their childhood, they tend to struggle with trusting others (Knox, 2016; Luyten et al., 2020) .They may also find it hard to reduce their epistemic vigilance and view others as supportive (Liotti, 2019; Liotti et al., 2021; Oehlman Forbes et al., 2021). Anxious and ambivalent attachment styles are significant factors contributing to disrupted trust in relationships and are positively correlated with epistemic mistrust. That is because, theoretically, individuals with damaged attachment styles are less reliant on others, rigid, and inflexible, which reduces their capacity for acquiring new information (Bateman &amp; Fonagy, 2008; Fonagy et al., 2017; Fonagy et al., 2018).&lt;br /&gt;Epistemic credulity decreases with increasing educational levels, which is attributed to the enhancement of critical thinking in higher education (Campbell et al., 2021). Epistemic credulity has a positive and significant relationship with childhood trauma and insecure attachment, which is theoretically justified by the close link between the domains of attachment and epistemic trust (Bo et al., 2017; Campbell et al., 2021; Koenig &amp; Harris, 2007). Epistemic credulity and epistemic mistrust have a positive relationship with insecure attachment (Bo et al., 2017). The negative relationship between epistemic credulity and self-efficacy arises from the fact that individuals with lower self-efficacy tend to have less agency, trust others&#039; opinions and the analyses of situations more, and overlook their own agency when analyzing issues (Sherer et al., 1982).&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; </OtherAbstract>
		<ObjectList>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">epistemic trust</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Childhood Trauma</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Reflective Performance</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">General Self-Efficacy</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Attachment</Param>
			</Object>
		</ObjectList>
<ArchiveCopySource DocType="pdf">https://cbs.ui.ac.ir/article_29121_0af49ee16ce5290cfdd6c02b399ae50c.pdf</ArchiveCopySource>
</Article>

<Article>
<Journal>
				<PublisherName>University of Isfahan</PublisherName>
				<JournalTitle>Research in Cognitive and Behavioral Sciences</JournalTitle>
				<Issn>2251-7642</Issn>
				<Volume>14</Volume>
				<Issue>1</Issue>
				<PubDate PubStatus="epublish">
					<Year>2024</Year>
					<Month>08</Month>
					<Day>22</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</Journal>
<ArticleTitle>Investigating the relationship between cultural intelligence and emotional labor with job satisfaction considering the mediating role of emotional capital and empathy in employees of hotels</ArticleTitle>
<VernacularTitle>Investigating the relationship between cultural intelligence and emotional labor with job satisfaction considering the mediating role of emotional capital and empathy in employees of hotels</VernacularTitle>
			<FirstPage>83</FirstPage>
			<LastPage>102</LastPage>
			<ELocationID EIdType="pii">29093</ELocationID>
			
<ELocationID EIdType="doi">10.22108/cbs.2024.142023.1908</ELocationID>
			
			<Language>FA</Language>
<AuthorList>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Hajar</FirstName>
					<LastName>Barati</LastName>
<Affiliation>Assistant Professor, Department of Psychology, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran.</Affiliation>
<Identifier Source="ORCID">0000-0002-9105-4367</Identifier>

</Author>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Shabnam</FirstName>
					<LastName>Hashemi</LastName>
<Affiliation>Master of Psychology, Almahdi Mehr Higher Education Institute of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran.</Affiliation>
<Identifier Source="ORCID">0000-0002-9105-4367</Identifier>

</Author>
</AuthorList>
				<PublicationType>Journal Article</PublicationType>
			<History>
				<PubDate PubStatus="received">
					<Year>2024</Year>
					<Month>07</Month>
					<Day>03</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</History>
		<Abstract>This study investigated the relationship between cultural intelligence and emotional labor with job satisfaction and considered the mediating role of emotional capital and empathy in Isfahan hotel employees. This study is correlational. The sample included 240 employees in hotels, who were selected by cluster sampling method. The research tools were a job satisfaction questionnaire (Moghimi, 2010), Affective Capital Questionnaire (ACQ) (Golparvar, 2015), the Emotional Labor questionnaire (Hsieh et al., 2016), the Cultural Intelligence Scale (CQS) (Ang et al., 2007), and Empathy Ethnocultural Scale (Wang et al., 2003). Path analysis in PLS software was used to analyze the data. The findings indicated that cultural intelligence affects emotional capital and empathy, and emotional capital on job satisfaction. Besides, emotional work on emotional capital and empathy has a positive and significant impact. Also, the results showed that emotional capital had a mediating role in the relationship between cultural intelligence and emotional labor with job satisfaction, while the mediating role of empathy was not confirmed. Based on the results, hotel management should try to make the most of emotional capital using cultural intelligence. They should plan and implement training to increase cultural intelligence, emotional labor, and emotional capital.
&lt;strong&gt;Introduction&lt;/strong&gt;
Job satisfaction leads service employees to behave positively and compassionately towards customers. Therefore, it is essential to ensure exceptional customer service and organizational performance. One of the factors affecting employee job satisfaction in the hospitality sector is based on the theoretical foundations of employees&#039; emotional labor and cultural intelligence (AlMazrouei &amp; Zacca, 2021; Hwang &amp; Park, 2022). Because the tourism and hospitality industries are truly global and multicultural, the artistic intelligence of employees in this sector plays a crucial role. Also, employees in the service sector are expected to have a positive, friendly, and smiling demeanor, even in situations where they are faced with negative emotional reactions to the provision of routine services. Various studies have been conducted on the relationship between emotional labor and cultural intelligence with job satisfaction; however, there are mediating variables that have not been addressed before. In the present study, emotional capital and employee empathy are examined as two mediating variables. Employee empathy in the service sector (i.e., personal care and attention) is one of the things that is considered a key requirement for winning service encounters. The success of service interactions is based on the intensity of empathy visible in employee-customer interactions. On the other hand, emotional capital is also effective in developing employee job satisfaction. Both of these can be influenced by cultural intelligence and emotional labor (Ghyasi &amp; Gurbuz, 2023). Therefore, considering what was stated in the statement of the problem, the present study seeks to study the relationship between cultural intelligence and emotional labor with the job satisfaction of Isfahan hotel employees and to determine the extent of the mediating role of emotional capital and empathy in their relationship.
&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Method&lt;/strong&gt;
This is a correlational study. The sample consisted of 240 hotel employees in Isfahan who were selected using cluster sampling. The research instruments were the Job Satisfaction Questionnaire (Moghimi, 2011), the Affective Capital Questionnaire (ACQ) (Golparvar, 2016), the Emotional Labor Questionnaire (Hsieh et al., 2016), the Cultural Intelligence Scale (CQS) (Ang et al., 2007), and the Empathy Ethnocultural Scale (Wang et al., 2003). Path analysis was used in PLS software to analyze the data. In this study, ethical principles related to protecting the rights of participants were considered, including obtaining informed consent to participate in the study and ensuring the confidentiality of information.
 
&lt;strong&gt;Results&lt;/strong&gt;
Based on the coefficient of determination index, the significance of the path coefficient, and the effect size index, it was determined that the model of the relationship between cultural intelligence and emotional labor with job satisfaction had a good fit considering the mediating role of emotional capital and empathy in hotel employees in Isfahan. The results indicated that cultural intelligence has a positive and significant effect on emotional capital and empathy, emotional capital on job satisfaction, and emotional labor on emotional capital and empathy. The results also showed that emotional capital had a mediating role in the relationship between cultural intelligence and emotional labor with job satisfaction, while the mediating role of empathy was not confirmed.
 
&lt;strong&gt;Conclusion&lt;/strong&gt;
Based on the results, the hotel management system should try to make the most use of emotional capital by applying cultural intelligence. They should plan and implement training to increase cultural intelligence, emotional labor, and emotional capital. Due to the limited scope of the statistical community, generalization of the results to other communities should be done with caution. Future researchers are advised to study other samples and communities as well. Even though this study was conducted in Isfahan, which is a tourist destination, due to uncontrollable factors such as sanctions, the clientele and guests of hotels may predominantly consist of domestic travelers rather than international visitors, which could potentially diminish the significance of cultural intelligence. This is because, in this particular field, more subcultures and the differences between them become important.
 
&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;
 </Abstract>
			<OtherAbstract Language="FA">This study investigated the relationship between cultural intelligence and emotional labor with job satisfaction and considered the mediating role of emotional capital and empathy in Isfahan hotel employees. This study is correlational. The sample included 240 employees in hotels, who were selected by cluster sampling method. The research tools were a job satisfaction questionnaire (Moghimi, 2010), Affective Capital Questionnaire (ACQ) (Golparvar, 2015), the Emotional Labor questionnaire (Hsieh et al., 2016), the Cultural Intelligence Scale (CQS) (Ang et al., 2007), and Empathy Ethnocultural Scale (Wang et al., 2003). Path analysis in PLS software was used to analyze the data. The findings indicated that cultural intelligence affects emotional capital and empathy, and emotional capital on job satisfaction. Besides, emotional work on emotional capital and empathy has a positive and significant impact. Also, the results showed that emotional capital had a mediating role in the relationship between cultural intelligence and emotional labor with job satisfaction, while the mediating role of empathy was not confirmed. Based on the results, hotel management should try to make the most of emotional capital using cultural intelligence. They should plan and implement training to increase cultural intelligence, emotional labor, and emotional capital.
&lt;strong&gt;Introduction&lt;/strong&gt;
Job satisfaction leads service employees to behave positively and compassionately towards customers. Therefore, it is essential to ensure exceptional customer service and organizational performance. One of the factors affecting employee job satisfaction in the hospitality sector is based on the theoretical foundations of employees&#039; emotional labor and cultural intelligence (AlMazrouei &amp; Zacca, 2021; Hwang &amp; Park, 2022). Because the tourism and hospitality industries are truly global and multicultural, the artistic intelligence of employees in this sector plays a crucial role. Also, employees in the service sector are expected to have a positive, friendly, and smiling demeanor, even in situations where they are faced with negative emotional reactions to the provision of routine services. Various studies have been conducted on the relationship between emotional labor and cultural intelligence with job satisfaction; however, there are mediating variables that have not been addressed before. In the present study, emotional capital and employee empathy are examined as two mediating variables. Employee empathy in the service sector (i.e., personal care and attention) is one of the things that is considered a key requirement for winning service encounters. The success of service interactions is based on the intensity of empathy visible in employee-customer interactions. On the other hand, emotional capital is also effective in developing employee job satisfaction. Both of these can be influenced by cultural intelligence and emotional labor (Ghyasi &amp; Gurbuz, 2023). Therefore, considering what was stated in the statement of the problem, the present study seeks to study the relationship between cultural intelligence and emotional labor with the job satisfaction of Isfahan hotel employees and to determine the extent of the mediating role of emotional capital and empathy in their relationship.
&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Method&lt;/strong&gt;
This is a correlational study. The sample consisted of 240 hotel employees in Isfahan who were selected using cluster sampling. The research instruments were the Job Satisfaction Questionnaire (Moghimi, 2011), the Affective Capital Questionnaire (ACQ) (Golparvar, 2016), the Emotional Labor Questionnaire (Hsieh et al., 2016), the Cultural Intelligence Scale (CQS) (Ang et al., 2007), and the Empathy Ethnocultural Scale (Wang et al., 2003). Path analysis was used in PLS software to analyze the data. In this study, ethical principles related to protecting the rights of participants were considered, including obtaining informed consent to participate in the study and ensuring the confidentiality of information.
 
&lt;strong&gt;Results&lt;/strong&gt;
Based on the coefficient of determination index, the significance of the path coefficient, and the effect size index, it was determined that the model of the relationship between cultural intelligence and emotional labor with job satisfaction had a good fit considering the mediating role of emotional capital and empathy in hotel employees in Isfahan. The results indicated that cultural intelligence has a positive and significant effect on emotional capital and empathy, emotional capital on job satisfaction, and emotional labor on emotional capital and empathy. The results also showed that emotional capital had a mediating role in the relationship between cultural intelligence and emotional labor with job satisfaction, while the mediating role of empathy was not confirmed.
 
&lt;strong&gt;Conclusion&lt;/strong&gt;
Based on the results, the hotel management system should try to make the most use of emotional capital by applying cultural intelligence. They should plan and implement training to increase cultural intelligence, emotional labor, and emotional capital. Due to the limited scope of the statistical community, generalization of the results to other communities should be done with caution. Future researchers are advised to study other samples and communities as well. Even though this study was conducted in Isfahan, which is a tourist destination, due to uncontrollable factors such as sanctions, the clientele and guests of hotels may predominantly consist of domestic travelers rather than international visitors, which could potentially diminish the significance of cultural intelligence. This is because, in this particular field, more subcultures and the differences between them become important.
 
&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;
 </OtherAbstract>
		<ObjectList>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Cultural Intelligence</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Emotional Labor</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Job satisfaction</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Emotional Capital</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Empathy, Hotel Employees</Param>
			</Object>
		</ObjectList>
<ArchiveCopySource DocType="pdf">https://cbs.ui.ac.ir/article_29093_156311227a319020c1a9a7c50fec1e18.pdf</ArchiveCopySource>
</Article>

<Article>
<Journal>
				<PublisherName>University of Isfahan</PublisherName>
				<JournalTitle>Research in Cognitive and Behavioral Sciences</JournalTitle>
				<Issn>2251-7642</Issn>
				<Volume>14</Volume>
				<Issue>1</Issue>
				<PubDate PubStatus="epublish">
					<Year>2024</Year>
					<Month>08</Month>
					<Day>22</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</Journal>
<ArticleTitle>The Effectiveness of Trauma-Aware Parenting Intervention on Relationship between Attachment and Emotional Disturbance in Adoptive Families</ArticleTitle>
<VernacularTitle>The Effectiveness of Trauma-Aware Parenting Intervention on Relationship between Attachment and Emotional Disturbance in Adoptive Families</VernacularTitle>
			<FirstPage>103</FirstPage>
			<LastPage>124</LastPage>
			<ELocationID EIdType="pii">28665</ELocationID>
			
<ELocationID EIdType="doi">10.22108/cbs.2024.140669.1879</ELocationID>
			
			<Language>FA</Language>
<AuthorList>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Mehrana</FirstName>
					<LastName>Mehrana</LastName>
<Affiliation>Master of Psychology,  Department of Psychology, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan Branch (Khorasgan), Isfahan, Iran.</Affiliation>

</Author>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Mansoureh</FirstName>
					<LastName>Bahramipour Isfahani</LastName>
<Affiliation>Assistant Professor, Department of Psychology, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan Branch, Khorasgan, Isfahan, Iran.</Affiliation>

</Author>
</AuthorList>
				<PublicationType>Journal Article</PublicationType>
			<History>
				<PubDate PubStatus="received">
					<Year>2024</Year>
					<Month>02</Month>
					<Day>08</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</History>
		<Abstract>The study was conducted with the aim of investigating the effectiveness of trauma–-informed parenting on the relationship between attachment and emotional disturbance in adoptive families. The research method was semi-experimental and included experimental and control groups with pre-test, post-test, and a 45-day follow-up period. The statistical population included all adoptive families from care centers for orphaned and abused children in the city of Isfahan in the summer, which were selected by the available sampling method among those who were referred to the care centers for orphaned and abused children in the city of Isfahan. Twenty people (20 experimental people) and (20 control people) were randomly divided to two groups. The research tools include Halpern and Kapenerek&#039;s relationship between the attachment questionnaire, and Simmons and Gaher&#039;s emotional disturbance. Trauma-informed parenting training was conducted in 120-minute sessions. Data analysis was done using statistical methods and SPSS 23 software.  The findings showed that the trauma- informed parenting intervention is effective in the relationship between attachment, and emotional turmoil in adoptive families (&lt;em&gt;p &lt;/em&gt;&lt;0.01). Therefore, it can be concluded that the intervention of conscious parenting is suitable for reducing the problems caused by adoption.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Introduction&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Family is the most important determining factor of children&#039;s behavior and plays a very important role in explaining their social position. Children learn the right and wrong of something in the family, and the family plays a significant role in the formation of their behavior. On the other hand, in our country every year more than 2000 children are admitted to care systems (boarding institutions and nurseries) due to parental neglect, violence or misbehavior, the death or divorce of parents (Annual report of welfare organization activity, 2017). Adoption is a complex social process that is often challenging and not always satisfactory. Adoptive parents may not have the knowledge  and skills necessary to meet the needs of the adopted child (Fisher, 2015). Children&#039;s adjustment issues and lack of parenting skills in adoptive families can lead to the failure or dissolution of adoption (Steinberg, Stacey, 2023). One of these methods is conscious parenting (CP) . Conscious parenting means awareness in all your interactions with your child (Shiraninia, et al, 2019). The goal of conscious parenting is to connect more deeply with children and nurture their nature. This model includes five dimensions of listening with full attention, non-judgmental acceptance of oneself and the child, emotional awareness towards oneself and the child, and self-regulation in relation to parenting (Matin et al, 2021). Various variables are very important in the relationship between adoptive families and children under their care, and one of these factors is attachment style. Bowlby (1969) identified three secure attachment styles, avoidant insecure attachment and ambivalent insecure attachment. It  is possible to acknowledge the child&#039;s expectations about the sensitivity, availability and responsiveness of the primary caregiver, leading to the formation of differences in the type of infant&#039;s attachment depends on the caregiver. Through these factors, the child gradually internalizes models of himself and others, which are called internal active models in the attachment perspective (Mohan, 2023). Emotional disturbance is also another influencing factor among adoptive families, in fact, emotional disturbance is a complex process and a combination of several main emotions such as anxiety, stress, depression and despair, and it usually occurs when a person is under stressful conditions, but he/she is unable to manage it (Ringeisen et al 2017). Emotional disturbance has 4 physical, emotional, cognitive and behavioral components (Inzlicht et al, 2015). Generally, it can be said that the importance of parenting, attachment styles (Quintigliano et al 2021) , and the effects of emotional disturbance (Hou et al 2020) are some factors that affect adoptive families, especially adoptive children. Considering the importance of the topic in improving parenting skills in adoptive families, different training interventions have been proposed, one of which is the conscious parenting model. This study seeks to answer the following question: Does trauma–-informed parenting affect on attachment style and emotional turmoil in adoptive families effective?&lt;br /&gt;​&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Methods&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The research method was semi-experimental with a pre-test, and post-test design and a 45-day follow-up period with a heterogeneous control group. This research had the ethics code number IR. IAU. KHUISF. REC.1402.338.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Based on the descriptive findings, the average attachment scores in the experimental group increased more than the control in the post-test and follow-up stages compared to the pre-test. The average emotional disturbance scores in the experimental group compared to the control showed a greater decrease in the post-test and follow-up phase than in the pre-test. Analysis of variance with repeated measures was used to investigate the research hypotheses, which allows the researcher to compare the experimental group (trauma–-informed parenting) and the control group in the research variables.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Table&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;strong&gt;1: &lt;/strong&gt;Descriptive indices of the scores of the research variables by two groups and three stages of the research&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Experiment&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Control&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;pre-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;post-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Follow-up&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;pre-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;post-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Follow-up&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Attachment style&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;mean&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;45.2&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;66.55&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;66.35&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;46.35&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;46.1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;46&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;SD&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;16/67&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;10/98&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;12/97&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;16/13&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;15/86&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;15/69&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Emotional disturbance&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;mean&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;46/15&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;36/05&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;36/15&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;46/85&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;46/7&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;46/65&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;SD&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;11/43&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;10/8&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;8/6&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;11/26&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;11/02&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;11/003&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Table 2: &lt;/strong&gt;The result of Tests of between-subject and within-Subjects in variables &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Variable&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;effect&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;source&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;SS&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;df&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;MS&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;F&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;p&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;effect size&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;power&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Emotional turmoil&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Between subjects&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;15.40891&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;15.40891&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;7.17&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.011&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.159&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.742&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;within the subject&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;time&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;697.017&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.003&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;695.248&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;11.497&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.002&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.232&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.911&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Time × group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;650.217&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.003&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;648.567&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;10.72&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.002&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.220&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.891&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Positive adaptive evolution&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Between subjects&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;320.311&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;320.311&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;6.84&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.013&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.153&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.722&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;within the subject&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;time&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;176.117&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.37&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;128.127&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;15.35&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.228&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.991&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Time × group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;218.617&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.37&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;159.046&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;19.057&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.334&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.998&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Emotional reaction&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Between subjects&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;414.408&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;414.408&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;39.63&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.51&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.000&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;within the subject&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;time&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;96.517&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.518&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;63.36&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;13.058&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.256&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.985&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Time × group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;98.617&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.518&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;64.944&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;13.34&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.26&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.988&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Negative behaviors&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Between subjects&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;310.408&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;310.408&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;17.089&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.310&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.981&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;within the subject&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;time&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;228.317&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.54&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;148.078&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;70.537&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.650&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.000&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Time × group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;204.017&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.54&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;132.326&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;63.03&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.624&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.000&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Avoiding the support of the attachment figure/caregiver&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Between subjects&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;582.208&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;585.208&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;36.31&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.489&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.000&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;within the subject&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;time&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;301.617&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.29&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;232.857&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;72.74&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.657&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.000&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Time × group &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;254.718&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;1.29&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;196.726&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;61.45&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;0.001&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;0.618&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;1.000&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The results have shown the interaction of time and group membership in the variables of emotional disturbance (F = 10.72, p &lt; 0.01), positive adaptive development (F = 19.05, p &lt; 0.001), emotional reaction (F =13, p &lt;0.001), negative behaviors (F =63, p  &lt;0.001) and avoidance of caregiver support (F =61.45, p &lt;0.001) are significant. It shows that the changes in the pre-test, post-test and follow-up stages were significant in each of the groups. The results of the Bonferroni post hoc test for comparing the experimental and control groups in the research stages are presented in Table (3).&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Table 3: &lt;/strong&gt;Result of Bonferroni test for Comparison of two groups according to research variables in two stages of post-test and follow-up&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Meaningfulness&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Effect size&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Average difference&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Stage&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Variable&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/846&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-0/7&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Pre-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Emotional Disturbance&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/278&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-10/65&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Post-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/276&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;10/5&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Follow-up&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/73&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/003&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-0/55&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Pre-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Positive adaptive evolution&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/275&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;5/1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Post-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/324&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;5/25&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Follow-up&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/118&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/063&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-1/2&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Pre-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Emotional reaction&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/451&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-4/55&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Post-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/579&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-5/4&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Follow-up&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/617&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/007&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/4&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Pre-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Negative behaviors&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/551&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-5/65&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Post-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/381&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-4/4&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Follow-up&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Avoiding face&lt;br /&gt; Support&lt;br /&gt;Attachment/caregiver&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/725&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/003&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-0/3&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Pre-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/634&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-/565&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Post-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;0/001&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;0/621&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;-6/3&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Follow-up&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;The results in Table (3) show that the difference between the experimental group, i.e., trauma-aware parenting, and the control group in all research variables in the pre-test stage is insignificant (p&lt;0.05); however, the results show that the difference between the two groups in the variables of emotional disturbance and the dimensions of relationships between attachment in the post-test and follow-up stages is significant (p&lt;0.001). The effect of trauma-aware parenting on emotional disturbance is 27.8% and 27.6% in the follow-up stage. The effect of training on the dimensions of positive adaptive development, emotional reaction, negative behaviors and avoidance of caregiver support is 27.5%, 45%, 55% and 63.6% in the post-test and 32.4%, 57.9%, 38% and 62% in the follow-up stage, respectively.&lt;br /&gt;Also, the results of the paired Bonferroni test showed that in the variable of parent-child attachment style, there was no significant difference between the experimental and control groups in the pre-test stage (p&lt;0.05). However, the difference in the mean scores of this variable in the experimental and control groups was significant in the post-test and follow-up stage (p&lt;0.001). The effect of the harm-aware parenting intervention on parent-child attachment style in the post-test stage was 39.8% and 40% in the follow-up stage. In the variable of emotional disturbance, there was no significant difference between the experimental and control groups in the pre-test stage (p&lt;0.05). However, the difference in the mean scores of this variable in the experimental and control groups was significant in the post-test and follow-up stage (p&lt;0.001). The effect of the harm-aware parenting intervention in the post-test stage was 27.8% and 27.6% in the follow-up stage.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Discussions&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Informed parents value both autonomous behavior and discipline, and rational control and calculated freedom make children internalize the rules and principles of correct behavior and feel responsible for their actions and behavior. In addition to being warm and affectionate, these parents push their children towards independence, thus providing an environment for the child to feel valued. These mentioned characteristics are also the characteristics of people with a secure attachment style who, in their internal activation patterns and others, reach the cognitive conclusion that they are valuable and worth being cared for, and that others (here, adoptive parents) are caring and responsive people. They will be present when needed and will satisfy their needs. People with secure attachment are those people who have a positive sense of themselves and a positive understanding of others, and are more socially confident and successful. Therefore, the intervention of conscious parenting by strengthening parents&#039; awareness and knowledge in the seventh steps by practicing compassion and kindness and re-connecting with their body in the position of a parent, watching the body during the stress of parenting, was able to make them aware of the benefits of a secure attachment style. Therefore, it is not far from the expectation that conscious parenting by strengthening such steps and exercises will provide a safe environment with a safe attachment style. Conscious parenting acts as a potential psychological resource in times of stress and helps parents to cope more adaptively and avoid the destructive effects of psychological evaluations related to parenting and family (Turpyn &amp; Chaplin, 2016). Also, in this method, parents learn to be kind and compassionate towards themselves, their children and others by doing love and friendship meditation and self-compassion exercises, and this reduces self-blame and stress in them. Also, experiencing children with the five senses, such as touch and hugging, increases the release of oxytoxin and, as a result, reduces stress (Hou et al., 2020) , and beyond that, with the reduction of stress, the emotional turmoil that governs relationships in children is also reduced. This training is suitable for parents who themselves suffer from psychological problems (Dalen et al, 2020) and can decrease their children&#039;s psychological problems and emotional turmoil through increasing their awareness.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The study was conducted with the aim of investigating the effectiveness of trauma–-informed parenting on the relationship between attachment and emotional disturbance in adoptive families. The research method was semi-experimental and included experimental and control groups with pre-test, post-test, and a 45-day follow-up period. The statistical population included all adoptive families from care centers for orphaned and abused children in the city of Isfahan in the summer, which were selected by the available sampling method among those who were referred to the care centers for orphaned and abused children in the city of Isfahan. Twenty people (20 experimental people) and (20 control people) were randomly divided to two groups. The research tools include Halpern and Kapenerek&#039;s relationship between the attachment questionnaire, and Simmons and Gaher&#039;s emotional disturbance. Trauma-informed parenting training was conducted in 120-minute sessions. Data analysis was done using statistical methods and SPSS 23 software.  The findings showed that the trauma- informed parenting intervention is effective in the relationship between attachment, and emotional turmoil in adoptive families (&lt;em&gt;p &lt;/em&gt;&lt;0.01). Therefore, it can be concluded that the intervention of conscious parenting is suitable for reducing the problems caused by adoption.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Keywords:&lt;/strong&gt; Emotional Disturbance, Adoptive Families, Relationship Between Attachment, Trauma-Aware Parenting Intervention.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Introduction&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Family is the most important determining factor of children&#039;s behavior and plays a very important role in explaining their social position. Children learn the right and wrong of something in the family, and the family plays a significant role in the formation of their behavior. On the other hand, in our country every year more than 2000 children are admitted to care systems (boarding institutions and nurseries) due to parental neglect, violence or misbehavior, the death or divorce of parents (Annual report of welfare organization activity, 2017). Adoption is a complex social process that is often challenging and not always satisfactory. Adoptive parents may not have the knowledge  and skills necessary to meet the needs of the adopted child (Fisher, 2015). Children&#039;s adjustment issues and lack of parenting skills in adoptive families can lead to the failure or dissolution of adoption (Steinberg, Stacey, 2023). One of these methods is conscious parenting (CP) . Conscious parenting means awareness in all your interactions with your child (Shiraninia, et al, 2019). The goal of conscious parenting is to connect more deeply with children and nurture their nature. This model includes five dimensions of listening with full attention, non-judgmental acceptance of oneself and the child, emotional awareness towards oneself and the child, and self-regulation in relation to parenting (Matin et al, 2021). Various variables are very important in the relationship between adoptive families and children under their care, and one of these factors is attachment style. Bowlby (1969) identified three secure attachment styles, avoidant insecure attachment and ambivalent insecure attachment. It  is possible to acknowledge the child&#039;s expectations about the sensitivity, availability and responsiveness of the primary caregiver, leading to the formation of differences in the type of infant&#039;s attachment depends on the caregiver. Through these factors, the child gradually internalizes models of himself and others, which are called internal active models in the attachment perspective (Mohan, 2023). Emotional disturbance is also another influencing factor among adoptive families, in fact, emotional disturbance is a complex process and a combination of several main emotions such as anxiety, stress, depression and despair, and it usually occurs when a person is under stressful conditions, but he/she is unable to manage it (Ringeisen et al 2017). Emotional disturbance has 4 physical, emotional, cognitive and behavioral components (Inzlicht et al, 2015). Generally, it can be said that the importance of parenting, attachment styles (Quintigliano et al 2021) , and the effects of emotional disturbance (Hou et al 2020) are some factors that affect adoptive families, especially adoptive children. Considering the importance of the topic in improving parenting skills in adoptive families, different training interventions have been proposed, one of which is the conscious parenting model. This study seeks to answer the following question: Does trauma–-informed parenting affect on attachment style and emotional turmoil in adoptive families effective?&lt;br /&gt;​&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Methods&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The research method was semi-experimental with a pre-test, and post-test design and a 45-day follow-up period with a heterogeneous control group. This research had the ethics code number IR. IAU. KHUISF. REC.1402.338.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Based on the descriptive findings, the average attachment scores in the experimental group increased more than the control in the post-test and follow-up stages compared to the pre-test. The average emotional disturbance scores in the experimental group compared to the control showed a greater decrease in the post-test and follow-up phase than in the pre-test. Analysis of variance with repeated measures was used to investigate the research hypotheses, which allows the researcher to compare the experimental group (trauma–-informed parenting) and the control group in the research variables.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Table&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;strong&gt;1: &lt;/strong&gt;Descriptive indices of the scores of the research variables by two groups and three stages of the research&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Experiment&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Control&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;pre-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;post-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Follow-up&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;pre-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;post-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Follow-up&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Attachment style&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;mean&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;45.2&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;66.55&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;66.35&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;46.35&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;46.1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;46&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;SD&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;16/67&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;10/98&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;12/97&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;16/13&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;15/86&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;15/69&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Emotional disturbance&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;mean&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;46/15&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;36/05&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;36/15&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;46/85&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;46/7&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;46/65&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;SD&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;11/43&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;10/8&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;8/6&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;11/26&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;11/02&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;11/003&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Table 2: &lt;/strong&gt;The result of Tests of between-subject and within-Subjects in variables &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Variable&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;effect&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;source&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;SS&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;df&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;MS&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;F&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;p&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;effect size&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;power&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Emotional turmoil&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Between subjects&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;15.40891&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;15.40891&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;7.17&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.011&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.159&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.742&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;within the subject&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;time&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;697.017&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.003&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;695.248&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;11.497&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.002&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.232&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.911&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Time × group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;650.217&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.003&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;648.567&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;10.72&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.002&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.220&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.891&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Positive adaptive evolution&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Between subjects&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;320.311&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;320.311&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;6.84&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.013&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.153&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.722&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;within the subject&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;time&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;176.117&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.37&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;128.127&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;15.35&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.228&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.991&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Time × group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;218.617&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.37&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;159.046&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;19.057&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.334&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.998&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Emotional reaction&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Between subjects&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;414.408&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;414.408&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;39.63&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.51&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.000&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;within the subject&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;time&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;96.517&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.518&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;63.36&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;13.058&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.256&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.985&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Time × group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;98.617&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.518&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;64.944&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;13.34&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.26&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.988&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Negative behaviors&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Between subjects&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;310.408&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;310.408&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;17.089&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.310&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.981&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;within the subject&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;time&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;228.317&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.54&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;148.078&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;70.537&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.650&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.000&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Time × group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;204.017&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.54&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;132.326&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;63.03&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.624&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.000&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Avoiding the support of the attachment figure/caregiver&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Between subjects&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;582.208&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;585.208&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;36.31&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.489&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.000&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;within the subject&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;time&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;301.617&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.29&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;232.857&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;72.74&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.657&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.000&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Time × group &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;254.718&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;1.29&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;196.726&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;61.45&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;0.001&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;0.618&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;1.000&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The results have shown the interaction of time and group membership in the variables of emotional disturbance (F = 10.72, p &lt; 0.01), positive adaptive development (F = 19.05, p &lt; 0.001), emotional reaction (F =13, p &lt;0.001), negative behaviors (F =63, p  &lt;0.001) and avoidance of caregiver support (F =61.45, p &lt;0.001) are significant. It shows that the changes in the pre-test, post-test and follow-up stages were significant in each of the groups. The results of the Bonferroni post hoc test for comparing the experimental and control groups in the research stages are presented in Table (3).&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Table 3: &lt;/strong&gt;Result of Bonferroni test for Comparison of two groups according to research variables in two stages of post-test and follow-up&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Meaningfulness&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Effect size&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Average difference&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Stage&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Variable&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/846&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-0/7&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Pre-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Emotional Disturbance&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/278&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-10/65&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Post-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/276&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;10/5&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Follow-up&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/73&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/003&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-0/55&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Pre-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Positive adaptive evolution&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/275&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;5/1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Post-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/324&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;5/25&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Follow-up&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/118&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/063&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-1/2&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Pre-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Emotional reaction&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/451&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-4/55&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Post-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/579&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-5/4&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Follow-up&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/617&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/007&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/4&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Pre-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Negative behaviors&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/551&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-5/65&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Post-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/381&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-4/4&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Follow-up&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Avoiding face&lt;br /&gt; Support&lt;br /&gt;Attachment/caregiver&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/725&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/003&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-0/3&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Pre-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/634&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-/565&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Post-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;0/001&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;0/621&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;-6/3&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Follow-up&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;The results in Table (3) show that the difference between the experimental group, i.e., trauma-aware parenting, and the control group in all research variables in the pre-test stage is insignificant (p&lt;0.05); however, the results show that the difference between the two groups in the variables of emotional disturbance and the dimensions of relationships between attachment in the post-test and follow-up stages is significant (p&lt;0.001). The effect of trauma-aware parenting on emotional disturbance is 27.8% and 27.6% in the follow-up stage. The effect of training on the dimensions of positive adaptive development, emotional reaction, negative behaviors and avoidance of caregiver support is 27.5%, 45%, 55% and 63.6% in the post-test and 32.4%, 57.9%, 38% and 62% in the follow-up stage, respectively.&lt;br /&gt;Also, the results of the paired Bonferroni test showed that in the variable of parent-child attachment style, there was no significant difference between the experimental and control groups in the pre-test stage (p&lt;0.05). However, the difference in the mean scores of this variable in the experimental and control groups was significant in the post-test and follow-up stage (p&lt;0.001). The effect of the harm-aware parenting intervention on parent-child attachment style in the post-test stage was 39.8% and 40% in the follow-up stage. In the variable of emotional disturbance, there was no significant difference between the experimental and control groups in the pre-test stage (p&lt;0.05). However, the difference in the mean scores of this variable in the experimental and control groups was significant in the post-test and follow-up stage (p&lt;0.001). The effect of the harm-aware parenting intervention in the post-test stage was 27.8% and 27.6% in the follow-up stage.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Discussions&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Informed parents value both autonomous behavior and discipline, and rational control and calculated freedom make children internalize the rules and principles of correct behavior and feel responsible for their actions and behavior. In addition to being warm and affectionate, these parents push their children towards independence, thus providing an environment for the child to feel valued. These mentioned characteristics are also the characteristics of people with a secure attachment style who, in their internal activation patterns and others, reach the cognitive conclusion that they are valuable and worth being cared for, and that others (here, adoptive parents) are caring and responsive people. They will be present when needed and will satisfy their needs. People with secure attachment are those people who have a positive sense of themselves and a positive understanding of others, and are more socially confident and successful. Therefore, the intervention of conscious parenting by strengthening parents&#039; awareness and knowledge in the seventh steps by practicing compassion and kindness and re-connecting with their body in the position of a parent, watching the body during the stress of parenting, was able to make them aware of the benefits of a secure attachment style. Therefore, it is not far from the expectation that conscious parenting by strengthening such steps and exercises will provide a safe environment with a safe attachment style. Conscious parenting acts as a potential psychological resource in times of stress and helps parents to cope more adaptively and avoid the destructive effects of psychological evaluations related to parenting and family (Turpyn &amp; Chaplin, 2016). Also, in this method, parents learn to be kind and compassionate towards themselves, their children and others by doing love and friendship meditation and self-compassion exercises, and this reduces self-blame and stress in them. Also, experiencing children with the five senses, such as touch and hugging, increases the release of oxytoxin and, as a result, reduces stress (Hou et al., 2020) , and beyond that, with the reduction of stress, the emotional turmoil that governs relationships in children is also reduced. This training is suitable for parents who themselves suffer from psychological problems (Dalen et al, 2020) and can decrease their children&#039;s psychological problems and emotional turmoil through increasing their awareness.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; </Abstract>
			<OtherAbstract Language="FA">The study was conducted with the aim of investigating the effectiveness of trauma–-informed parenting on the relationship between attachment and emotional disturbance in adoptive families. The research method was semi-experimental and included experimental and control groups with pre-test, post-test, and a 45-day follow-up period. The statistical population included all adoptive families from care centers for orphaned and abused children in the city of Isfahan in the summer, which were selected by the available sampling method among those who were referred to the care centers for orphaned and abused children in the city of Isfahan. Twenty people (20 experimental people) and (20 control people) were randomly divided to two groups. The research tools include Halpern and Kapenerek&#039;s relationship between the attachment questionnaire, and Simmons and Gaher&#039;s emotional disturbance. Trauma-informed parenting training was conducted in 120-minute sessions. Data analysis was done using statistical methods and SPSS 23 software.  The findings showed that the trauma- informed parenting intervention is effective in the relationship between attachment, and emotional turmoil in adoptive families (&lt;em&gt;p &lt;/em&gt;&lt;0.01). Therefore, it can be concluded that the intervention of conscious parenting is suitable for reducing the problems caused by adoption.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Introduction&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Family is the most important determining factor of children&#039;s behavior and plays a very important role in explaining their social position. Children learn the right and wrong of something in the family, and the family plays a significant role in the formation of their behavior. On the other hand, in our country every year more than 2000 children are admitted to care systems (boarding institutions and nurseries) due to parental neglect, violence or misbehavior, the death or divorce of parents (Annual report of welfare organization activity, 2017). Adoption is a complex social process that is often challenging and not always satisfactory. Adoptive parents may not have the knowledge  and skills necessary to meet the needs of the adopted child (Fisher, 2015). Children&#039;s adjustment issues and lack of parenting skills in adoptive families can lead to the failure or dissolution of adoption (Steinberg, Stacey, 2023). One of these methods is conscious parenting (CP) . Conscious parenting means awareness in all your interactions with your child (Shiraninia, et al, 2019). The goal of conscious parenting is to connect more deeply with children and nurture their nature. This model includes five dimensions of listening with full attention, non-judgmental acceptance of oneself and the child, emotional awareness towards oneself and the child, and self-regulation in relation to parenting (Matin et al, 2021). Various variables are very important in the relationship between adoptive families and children under their care, and one of these factors is attachment style. Bowlby (1969) identified three secure attachment styles, avoidant insecure attachment and ambivalent insecure attachment. It  is possible to acknowledge the child&#039;s expectations about the sensitivity, availability and responsiveness of the primary caregiver, leading to the formation of differences in the type of infant&#039;s attachment depends on the caregiver. Through these factors, the child gradually internalizes models of himself and others, which are called internal active models in the attachment perspective (Mohan, 2023). Emotional disturbance is also another influencing factor among adoptive families, in fact, emotional disturbance is a complex process and a combination of several main emotions such as anxiety, stress, depression and despair, and it usually occurs when a person is under stressful conditions, but he/she is unable to manage it (Ringeisen et al 2017). Emotional disturbance has 4 physical, emotional, cognitive and behavioral components (Inzlicht et al, 2015). Generally, it can be said that the importance of parenting, attachment styles (Quintigliano et al 2021) , and the effects of emotional disturbance (Hou et al 2020) are some factors that affect adoptive families, especially adoptive children. Considering the importance of the topic in improving parenting skills in adoptive families, different training interventions have been proposed, one of which is the conscious parenting model. This study seeks to answer the following question: Does trauma–-informed parenting affect on attachment style and emotional turmoil in adoptive families effective?&lt;br /&gt;​&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Methods&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The research method was semi-experimental with a pre-test, and post-test design and a 45-day follow-up period with a heterogeneous control group. This research had the ethics code number IR. IAU. KHUISF. REC.1402.338.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Based on the descriptive findings, the average attachment scores in the experimental group increased more than the control in the post-test and follow-up stages compared to the pre-test. The average emotional disturbance scores in the experimental group compared to the control showed a greater decrease in the post-test and follow-up phase than in the pre-test. Analysis of variance with repeated measures was used to investigate the research hypotheses, which allows the researcher to compare the experimental group (trauma–-informed parenting) and the control group in the research variables.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Table&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;strong&gt;1: &lt;/strong&gt;Descriptive indices of the scores of the research variables by two groups and three stages of the research&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Experiment&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Control&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;pre-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;post-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Follow-up&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;pre-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;post-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Follow-up&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Attachment style&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;mean&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;45.2&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;66.55&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;66.35&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;46.35&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;46.1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;46&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;SD&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;16/67&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;10/98&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;12/97&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;16/13&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;15/86&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;15/69&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Emotional disturbance&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;mean&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;46/15&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;36/05&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;36/15&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;46/85&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;46/7&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;46/65&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;SD&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;11/43&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;10/8&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;8/6&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;11/26&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;11/02&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;11/003&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Table 2: &lt;/strong&gt;The result of Tests of between-subject and within-Subjects in variables &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Variable&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;effect&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;source&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;SS&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;df&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;MS&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;F&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;p&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;effect size&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;power&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Emotional turmoil&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Between subjects&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;15.40891&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;15.40891&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;7.17&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.011&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.159&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.742&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;within the subject&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;time&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;697.017&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.003&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;695.248&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;11.497&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.002&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.232&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.911&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Time × group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;650.217&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.003&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;648.567&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;10.72&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.002&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.220&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.891&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Positive adaptive evolution&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Between subjects&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;320.311&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;320.311&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;6.84&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.013&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.153&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.722&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;within the subject&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;time&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;176.117&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.37&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;128.127&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;15.35&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.228&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.991&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Time × group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;218.617&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.37&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;159.046&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;19.057&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.334&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.998&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Emotional reaction&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Between subjects&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;414.408&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;414.408&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;39.63&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.51&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.000&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;within the subject&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;time&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;96.517&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.518&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;63.36&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;13.058&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.256&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.985&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Time × group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;98.617&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.518&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;64.944&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;13.34&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.26&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.988&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Negative behaviors&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Between subjects&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;310.408&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;310.408&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;17.089&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.310&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.981&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;within the subject&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;time&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;228.317&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.54&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;148.078&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;70.537&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.650&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.000&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Time × group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;204.017&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.54&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;132.326&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;63.03&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.624&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.000&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Avoiding the support of the attachment figure/caregiver&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Between subjects&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;582.208&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;585.208&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;36.31&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.489&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.000&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;within the subject&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;time&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;301.617&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.29&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;232.857&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;72.74&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.657&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.000&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Time × group &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;254.718&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;1.29&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;196.726&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;61.45&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;0.001&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;0.618&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;1.000&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The results have shown the interaction of time and group membership in the variables of emotional disturbance (F = 10.72, p &lt; 0.01), positive adaptive development (F = 19.05, p &lt; 0.001), emotional reaction (F =13, p &lt;0.001), negative behaviors (F =63, p  &lt;0.001) and avoidance of caregiver support (F =61.45, p &lt;0.001) are significant. It shows that the changes in the pre-test, post-test and follow-up stages were significant in each of the groups. The results of the Bonferroni post hoc test for comparing the experimental and control groups in the research stages are presented in Table (3).&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Table 3: &lt;/strong&gt;Result of Bonferroni test for Comparison of two groups according to research variables in two stages of post-test and follow-up&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Meaningfulness&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Effect size&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Average difference&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Stage&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Variable&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/846&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-0/7&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Pre-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Emotional Disturbance&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/278&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-10/65&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Post-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/276&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;10/5&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Follow-up&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/73&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/003&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-0/55&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Pre-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Positive adaptive evolution&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/275&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;5/1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Post-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/324&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;5/25&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Follow-up&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/118&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/063&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-1/2&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Pre-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Emotional reaction&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/451&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-4/55&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Post-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/579&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-5/4&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Follow-up&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/617&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/007&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/4&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Pre-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Negative behaviors&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/551&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-5/65&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Post-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/381&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-4/4&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Follow-up&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Avoiding face&lt;br /&gt; Support&lt;br /&gt;Attachment/caregiver&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/725&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/003&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-0/3&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Pre-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/634&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-/565&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Post-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;0/001&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;0/621&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;-6/3&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Follow-up&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;The results in Table (3) show that the difference between the experimental group, i.e., trauma-aware parenting, and the control group in all research variables in the pre-test stage is insignificant (p&lt;0.05); however, the results show that the difference between the two groups in the variables of emotional disturbance and the dimensions of relationships between attachment in the post-test and follow-up stages is significant (p&lt;0.001). The effect of trauma-aware parenting on emotional disturbance is 27.8% and 27.6% in the follow-up stage. The effect of training on the dimensions of positive adaptive development, emotional reaction, negative behaviors and avoidance of caregiver support is 27.5%, 45%, 55% and 63.6% in the post-test and 32.4%, 57.9%, 38% and 62% in the follow-up stage, respectively.&lt;br /&gt;Also, the results of the paired Bonferroni test showed that in the variable of parent-child attachment style, there was no significant difference between the experimental and control groups in the pre-test stage (p&lt;0.05). However, the difference in the mean scores of this variable in the experimental and control groups was significant in the post-test and follow-up stage (p&lt;0.001). The effect of the harm-aware parenting intervention on parent-child attachment style in the post-test stage was 39.8% and 40% in the follow-up stage. In the variable of emotional disturbance, there was no significant difference between the experimental and control groups in the pre-test stage (p&lt;0.05). However, the difference in the mean scores of this variable in the experimental and control groups was significant in the post-test and follow-up stage (p&lt;0.001). The effect of the harm-aware parenting intervention in the post-test stage was 27.8% and 27.6% in the follow-up stage.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Discussions&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Informed parents value both autonomous behavior and discipline, and rational control and calculated freedom make children internalize the rules and principles of correct behavior and feel responsible for their actions and behavior. In addition to being warm and affectionate, these parents push their children towards independence, thus providing an environment for the child to feel valued. These mentioned characteristics are also the characteristics of people with a secure attachment style who, in their internal activation patterns and others, reach the cognitive conclusion that they are valuable and worth being cared for, and that others (here, adoptive parents) are caring and responsive people. They will be present when needed and will satisfy their needs. People with secure attachment are those people who have a positive sense of themselves and a positive understanding of others, and are more socially confident and successful. Therefore, the intervention of conscious parenting by strengthening parents&#039; awareness and knowledge in the seventh steps by practicing compassion and kindness and re-connecting with their body in the position of a parent, watching the body during the stress of parenting, was able to make them aware of the benefits of a secure attachment style. Therefore, it is not far from the expectation that conscious parenting by strengthening such steps and exercises will provide a safe environment with a safe attachment style. Conscious parenting acts as a potential psychological resource in times of stress and helps parents to cope more adaptively and avoid the destructive effects of psychological evaluations related to parenting and family (Turpyn &amp; Chaplin, 2016). Also, in this method, parents learn to be kind and compassionate towards themselves, their children and others by doing love and friendship meditation and self-compassion exercises, and this reduces self-blame and stress in them. Also, experiencing children with the five senses, such as touch and hugging, increases the release of oxytoxin and, as a result, reduces stress (Hou et al., 2020) , and beyond that, with the reduction of stress, the emotional turmoil that governs relationships in children is also reduced. This training is suitable for parents who themselves suffer from psychological problems (Dalen et al, 2020) and can decrease their children&#039;s psychological problems and emotional turmoil through increasing their awareness.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The study was conducted with the aim of investigating the effectiveness of trauma–-informed parenting on the relationship between attachment and emotional disturbance in adoptive families. The research method was semi-experimental and included experimental and control groups with pre-test, post-test, and a 45-day follow-up period. The statistical population included all adoptive families from care centers for orphaned and abused children in the city of Isfahan in the summer, which were selected by the available sampling method among those who were referred to the care centers for orphaned and abused children in the city of Isfahan. Twenty people (20 experimental people) and (20 control people) were randomly divided to two groups. The research tools include Halpern and Kapenerek&#039;s relationship between the attachment questionnaire, and Simmons and Gaher&#039;s emotional disturbance. Trauma-informed parenting training was conducted in 120-minute sessions. Data analysis was done using statistical methods and SPSS 23 software.  The findings showed that the trauma- informed parenting intervention is effective in the relationship between attachment, and emotional turmoil in adoptive families (&lt;em&gt;p &lt;/em&gt;&lt;0.01). Therefore, it can be concluded that the intervention of conscious parenting is suitable for reducing the problems caused by adoption.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Keywords:&lt;/strong&gt; Emotional Disturbance, Adoptive Families, Relationship Between Attachment, Trauma-Aware Parenting Intervention.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Introduction&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Family is the most important determining factor of children&#039;s behavior and plays a very important role in explaining their social position. Children learn the right and wrong of something in the family, and the family plays a significant role in the formation of their behavior. On the other hand, in our country every year more than 2000 children are admitted to care systems (boarding institutions and nurseries) due to parental neglect, violence or misbehavior, the death or divorce of parents (Annual report of welfare organization activity, 2017). Adoption is a complex social process that is often challenging and not always satisfactory. Adoptive parents may not have the knowledge  and skills necessary to meet the needs of the adopted child (Fisher, 2015). Children&#039;s adjustment issues and lack of parenting skills in adoptive families can lead to the failure or dissolution of adoption (Steinberg, Stacey, 2023). One of these methods is conscious parenting (CP) . Conscious parenting means awareness in all your interactions with your child (Shiraninia, et al, 2019). The goal of conscious parenting is to connect more deeply with children and nurture their nature. This model includes five dimensions of listening with full attention, non-judgmental acceptance of oneself and the child, emotional awareness towards oneself and the child, and self-regulation in relation to parenting (Matin et al, 2021). Various variables are very important in the relationship between adoptive families and children under their care, and one of these factors is attachment style. Bowlby (1969) identified three secure attachment styles, avoidant insecure attachment and ambivalent insecure attachment. It  is possible to acknowledge the child&#039;s expectations about the sensitivity, availability and responsiveness of the primary caregiver, leading to the formation of differences in the type of infant&#039;s attachment depends on the caregiver. Through these factors, the child gradually internalizes models of himself and others, which are called internal active models in the attachment perspective (Mohan, 2023). Emotional disturbance is also another influencing factor among adoptive families, in fact, emotional disturbance is a complex process and a combination of several main emotions such as anxiety, stress, depression and despair, and it usually occurs when a person is under stressful conditions, but he/she is unable to manage it (Ringeisen et al 2017). Emotional disturbance has 4 physical, emotional, cognitive and behavioral components (Inzlicht et al, 2015). Generally, it can be said that the importance of parenting, attachment styles (Quintigliano et al 2021) , and the effects of emotional disturbance (Hou et al 2020) are some factors that affect adoptive families, especially adoptive children. Considering the importance of the topic in improving parenting skills in adoptive families, different training interventions have been proposed, one of which is the conscious parenting model. This study seeks to answer the following question: Does trauma–-informed parenting affect on attachment style and emotional turmoil in adoptive families effective?&lt;br /&gt;​&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Methods&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The research method was semi-experimental with a pre-test, and post-test design and a 45-day follow-up period with a heterogeneous control group. This research had the ethics code number IR. IAU. KHUISF. REC.1402.338.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Based on the descriptive findings, the average attachment scores in the experimental group increased more than the control in the post-test and follow-up stages compared to the pre-test. The average emotional disturbance scores in the experimental group compared to the control showed a greater decrease in the post-test and follow-up phase than in the pre-test. Analysis of variance with repeated measures was used to investigate the research hypotheses, which allows the researcher to compare the experimental group (trauma–-informed parenting) and the control group in the research variables.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Table&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;strong&gt;1: &lt;/strong&gt;Descriptive indices of the scores of the research variables by two groups and three stages of the research&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Experiment&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Control&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;pre-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;post-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Follow-up&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;pre-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;post-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Follow-up&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Attachment style&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;mean&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;45.2&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;66.55&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;66.35&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;46.35&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;46.1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;46&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;SD&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;16/67&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;10/98&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;12/97&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;16/13&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;15/86&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;15/69&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Emotional disturbance&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;mean&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;46/15&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;36/05&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;36/15&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;46/85&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;46/7&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;46/65&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;SD&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;11/43&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;10/8&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;8/6&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;11/26&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;11/02&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;11/003&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Table 2: &lt;/strong&gt;The result of Tests of between-subject and within-Subjects in variables &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Variable&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;effect&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;source&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;SS&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;df&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;MS&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;F&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;p&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;effect size&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;power&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Emotional turmoil&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Between subjects&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;15.40891&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;15.40891&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;7.17&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.011&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.159&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.742&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;within the subject&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;time&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;697.017&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.003&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;695.248&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;11.497&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.002&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.232&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.911&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Time × group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;650.217&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.003&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;648.567&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;10.72&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.002&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.220&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.891&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Positive adaptive evolution&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Between subjects&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;320.311&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;320.311&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;6.84&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.013&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.153&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.722&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;within the subject&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;time&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;176.117&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.37&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;128.127&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;15.35&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.228&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.991&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Time × group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;218.617&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.37&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;159.046&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;19.057&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.334&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.998&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Emotional reaction&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Between subjects&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;414.408&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;414.408&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;39.63&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.51&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.000&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;within the subject&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;time&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;96.517&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.518&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;63.36&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;13.058&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.256&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.985&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Time × group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;98.617&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.518&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;64.944&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;13.34&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.26&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.988&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Negative behaviors&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Between subjects&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;310.408&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;310.408&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;17.089&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.310&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.981&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;within the subject&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;time&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;228.317&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.54&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;148.078&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;70.537&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.650&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.000&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Time × group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;204.017&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.54&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;132.326&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;63.03&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.624&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.000&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Avoiding the support of the attachment figure/caregiver&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Between subjects&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;582.208&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;585.208&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;36.31&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.489&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.000&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;within the subject&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;time&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;301.617&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.29&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;232.857&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;72.74&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.657&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.000&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Time × group &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;254.718&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;1.29&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;196.726&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;61.45&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;0.001&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;0.618&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;1.000&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The results have shown the interaction of time and group membership in the variables of emotional disturbance (F = 10.72, p &lt; 0.01), positive adaptive development (F = 19.05, p &lt; 0.001), emotional reaction (F =13, p &lt;0.001), negative behaviors (F =63, p  &lt;0.001) and avoidance of caregiver support (F =61.45, p &lt;0.001) are significant. It shows that the changes in the pre-test, post-test and follow-up stages were significant in each of the groups. The results of the Bonferroni post hoc test for comparing the experimental and control groups in the research stages are presented in Table (3).&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Table 3: &lt;/strong&gt;Result of Bonferroni test for Comparison of two groups according to research variables in two stages of post-test and follow-up&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Meaningfulness&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Effect size&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Average difference&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Stage&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Variable&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/846&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-0/7&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Pre-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Emotional Disturbance&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/278&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-10/65&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Post-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/276&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;10/5&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Follow-up&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/73&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/003&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-0/55&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Pre-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Positive adaptive evolution&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/275&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;5/1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Post-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/324&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;5/25&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Follow-up&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/118&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/063&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-1/2&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Pre-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Emotional reaction&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/451&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-4/55&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Post-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/579&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-5/4&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Follow-up&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/617&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/007&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/4&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Pre-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Negative behaviors&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/551&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-5/65&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Post-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/381&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-4/4&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Follow-up&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Avoiding face&lt;br /&gt; Support&lt;br /&gt;Attachment/caregiver&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/725&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/003&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-0/3&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Pre-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0/634&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;-/565&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Post-test&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;0/001&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;0/621&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;-6/3&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Follow-up&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;The results in Table (3) show that the difference between the experimental group, i.e., trauma-aware parenting, and the control group in all research variables in the pre-test stage is insignificant (p&lt;0.05); however, the results show that the difference between the two groups in the variables of emotional disturbance and the dimensions of relationships between attachment in the post-test and follow-up stages is significant (p&lt;0.001). The effect of trauma-aware parenting on emotional disturbance is 27.8% and 27.6% in the follow-up stage. The effect of training on the dimensions of positive adaptive development, emotional reaction, negative behaviors and avoidance of caregiver support is 27.5%, 45%, 55% and 63.6% in the post-test and 32.4%, 57.9%, 38% and 62% in the follow-up stage, respectively.&lt;br /&gt;Also, the results of the paired Bonferroni test showed that in the variable of parent-child attachment style, there was no significant difference between the experimental and control groups in the pre-test stage (p&lt;0.05). However, the difference in the mean scores of this variable in the experimental and control groups was significant in the post-test and follow-up stage (p&lt;0.001). The effect of the harm-aware parenting intervention on parent-child attachment style in the post-test stage was 39.8% and 40% in the follow-up stage. In the variable of emotional disturbance, there was no significant difference between the experimental and control groups in the pre-test stage (p&lt;0.05). However, the difference in the mean scores of this variable in the experimental and control groups was significant in the post-test and follow-up stage (p&lt;0.001). The effect of the harm-aware parenting intervention in the post-test stage was 27.8% and 27.6% in the follow-up stage.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Discussions&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Informed parents value both autonomous behavior and discipline, and rational control and calculated freedom make children internalize the rules and principles of correct behavior and feel responsible for their actions and behavior. In addition to being warm and affectionate, these parents push their children towards independence, thus providing an environment for the child to feel valued. These mentioned characteristics are also the characteristics of people with a secure attachment style who, in their internal activation patterns and others, reach the cognitive conclusion that they are valuable and worth being cared for, and that others (here, adoptive parents) are caring and responsive people. They will be present when needed and will satisfy their needs. People with secure attachment are those people who have a positive sense of themselves and a positive understanding of others, and are more socially confident and successful. Therefore, the intervention of conscious parenting by strengthening parents&#039; awareness and knowledge in the seventh steps by practicing compassion and kindness and re-connecting with their body in the position of a parent, watching the body during the stress of parenting, was able to make them aware of the benefits of a secure attachment style. Therefore, it is not far from the expectation that conscious parenting by strengthening such steps and exercises will provide a safe environment with a safe attachment style. Conscious parenting acts as a potential psychological resource in times of stress and helps parents to cope more adaptively and avoid the destructive effects of psychological evaluations related to parenting and family (Turpyn &amp; Chaplin, 2016). Also, in this method, parents learn to be kind and compassionate towards themselves, their children and others by doing love and friendship meditation and self-compassion exercises, and this reduces self-blame and stress in them. Also, experiencing children with the five senses, such as touch and hugging, increases the release of oxytoxin and, as a result, reduces stress (Hou et al., 2020) , and beyond that, with the reduction of stress, the emotional turmoil that governs relationships in children is also reduced. This training is suitable for parents who themselves suffer from psychological problems (Dalen et al, 2020) and can decrease their children&#039;s psychological problems and emotional turmoil through increasing their awareness.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; </OtherAbstract>
		<ObjectList>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">emotional disturbance</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">adoptive families</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Relationship Between Attachment</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">trauma-aware parenting intervention</Param>
			</Object>
		</ObjectList>
<ArchiveCopySource DocType="pdf">https://cbs.ui.ac.ir/article_28665_fc8941296d74c009f9405499e6f68f4e.pdf</ArchiveCopySource>
</Article>

<Article>
<Journal>
				<PublisherName>University of Isfahan</PublisherName>
				<JournalTitle>Research in Cognitive and Behavioral Sciences</JournalTitle>
				<Issn>2251-7642</Issn>
				<Volume>14</Volume>
				<Issue>1</Issue>
				<PubDate PubStatus="epublish">
					<Year>2024</Year>
					<Month>08</Month>
					<Day>22</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</Journal>
<ArticleTitle>The Cognitive Correlates of Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder: The Predictive Role of Looming Maladaptive Style, Executive Function, Thought-Action Fusion and Metacognition</ArticleTitle>
<VernacularTitle>The Cognitive Correlates of Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder: The Predictive Role of Looming Maladaptive Style, Executive Function, Thought-Action Fusion and Metacognition</VernacularTitle>
			<FirstPage>125</FirstPage>
			<LastPage>150</LastPage>
			<ELocationID EIdType="pii">29255</ELocationID>
			
<ELocationID EIdType="doi">10.22108/cbs.2025.141156.1894</ELocationID>
			
			<Language>FA</Language>
<AuthorList>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Maryam</FirstName>
					<LastName>Koosheshi</LastName>
<Affiliation>M.A. in Cognitive Science, Faculty of Educational Sciences and Psychology, Azarbaijan Shahid Madani University, Tabriz, Iran.</Affiliation>

</Author>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Rahim</FirstName>
					<LastName>Yousefi</LastName>
<Affiliation>Associate Professor, Department of Psychology, Faculty of Educational Sciences and Psychology, Azarbaijan Shahid Madani University, Tabriz, Iran.</Affiliation>

</Author>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Ladan</FirstName>
					<LastName>Vaghef</LastName>
<Affiliation>Associate Professor, Department of Psychology, Faculty of Educational Sciences and Psychology, Azarbaijan Shahid Madani University, Tabriz, Iran.</Affiliation>

</Author>
</AuthorList>
				<PublicationType>Journal Article</PublicationType>
			<History>
				<PubDate PubStatus="received">
					<Year>2024</Year>
					<Month>04</Month>
					<Day>09</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</History>
		<Abstract>Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is one of the most common mental disorders, affecting all aspects of human life. In this study, 300 students from Azarbaijan Shahid Madani University participated through cluster sampling. The participants completed the Threat Magnification Maladaptive Style Questionnaire, the Barkley Deficits in Executive Functioning Scale, the Metacognition Assessment Questionnaire (30 items), the Thought-Action Fusion Questionnaire, and the Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale. The analysis revealed a significant positive correlation between positive beliefs about anxiety and components such as uncontrollability, confidence, self-management, self-control, and self-motivation, with statistical significance at the 1% level. Additionally, a positive and significant correlation was found between positive beliefs about anxiety, uncontrollability, the need for control, maladaptive style of physical threat magnification, and self-organization at the 5% level, and the cognitive component at the 1% level, with symptoms of obsessive-compulsive disorder. Regression analysis indicated that positive beliefs about anxiety, uncontrollability, self-management, and self-motivation significantly predicted the obsessive-compulsive disorder component. Moreover, the predictors of positive belief about anxiety, cognition, maladaptive style of social threat magnification, self-organization, and self-control significantly contributed to predicting obsessive-compulsive disorder component. Given importance of metacognitive beliefs and thought control strategies, influenced by metacognitive beliefs, metacognitive therapy may be useful in predicting and addressing obsessive-compulsive symptoms.
&lt;strong&gt;Introduction&lt;/strong&gt;
Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is characterized by obsessions, compulsions, or both. Obsessions are intrusive and distressing thoughts that persistently recur, often leading individuals to engage in compulsive actions to alleviate the distress (Jalal et al., 2023). Research shows that individuals with OCD, as well as non-clinical individuals with high OCD-related scores, exhibit significant cognitive biases. Cognitive models of OCD suggest that exaggerated evaluations of intrusive thoughts and a strong commitment to suppress them play a crucial role in distress and the urge to engage in behaviors such as compulsions, neutralizing actions, thought suppression, reassurance-seeking, and avoidance. When a heightened sense of vulnerability is triggered, it acts as a cognitive threat factor, making individuals more sensitive to danger cues and influencing their cognitive processes with a bias toward threat perception. Similar to other anxiety disorders, maladaptive threat magnification may heighten vulnerability to OCD by imposing a cognitive burden that undermines mental control abilities. Cognitive theory posits that cognitive processes are central to OCD (Jennings, 2022).
Literature indicates that individuals with high cognitive threat magnification are more susceptible to anxiety in stressful life events compared to those without this predisposition. However, a notable exception is the strong correlation between social and physical components of threat magnification in women compared to men (Gonzales Diez et al., 2014).
Thought-action fusion, a cognitive distortion, can be categorized into probability thought-action fusion and moral distortion (Einstein &amp; Menzies, 2004). Studies on probability and general thought-action fusion in clinical populations reveal high reliability in the general measure. Furthermore, strong links between general thought-action fusion and the probability subscales with OCD characteristics—relative to symptoms of depression and worry—have been confirmed (Myers &amp; Wells, 2013). Recent research has implicated neurological dysfunctions in OCD, including deficits in working memory and executive functions, which may play critical roles in the disorder&#039;s assessment and treatment (Bukhari, 2013). Individuals with OCD often exhibit impairments in cognitive control, cognitive flexibility, and inhibitory control.
Wells proposed a metacognitive theory of obsession that merges schema theory and information processing theory, highlighting beliefs individuals hold about their cognitive processes (McNicol &amp; Wells, 2012). A study found significant differences in metacognitive beliefs, thought control strategies, and anxiety-inducing thoughts among individuals with generalized anxiety disorder, OCD, dysthymia, and non-clinical individuals (Moin Al-Ghorabaiee et al., 2017).
The objective of this study was to address the question:
What role do cognitive correlates (specifically, predictors of maladaptive threat magnification style, executive functions, thought-action fusion, and metacognition) play in obsessive-compulsive disorder?
&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Methodology&lt;/strong&gt;
This study has a theoretical aim and employs a descriptive-correlational approach for data collection. The statistical population includes all students from Azarbaijan Shahid Madani University during the 2019-2020 academic year. A total of 300 participants were selected through cluster sampling. The following self-report questionnaires assessed maladaptive threat magnification style, executive functions, thought-action fusion, and metacognition in obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD): the Threat Magnification Self-Report Questionnaire, Barkley Deficits in Executive Functioning Scale, 30-item Metacognition Assessment Questionnaire, Thought-Action Fusion Questionnaire, and Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale. Data were analyzed using SPSS software at a significance level of (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&lt;0.05), and divided into descriptive and inferential sections. Descriptive measures of dispersion were used to characterize the research variables, while Pearson’s correlation coefficient and multiple regression analysis were utilized for inferential statistics.
 
&lt;strong&gt;Findings&lt;/strong&gt;
The sample comprised 193 females and 107 males, with 21 participants married and 279 single. Regarding education, 215 participants held bachelor&#039;s degrees, 70 ones had master&#039;s degrees, and 15 ones had doctoral degrees. Age distribution indicated that 68% were between 20-25 years and 32% between 30-35 years. Results showed that the skewness and kurtosis values for predictor and criterion variables suggested a normal distribution. Pearson correlation analysis revealed significant positive correlations between the positive belief component and components like uncontrollability, cognitive confidence, self-management, self-organization, self-control, and self-motivation. Furthermore, significant correlations existed between cognitive correlates (maladaptive threat magnification style, executive functions, thought-action fusion, and metacognition) and OCD symptoms, particularly in components of positive belief, uncontrollability, need for control, maladaptive physical threat magnification style, and self-organization with cognitive confidence. Regression analysis indicated that the predictor variables of positive belief about anxiety, uncontrollability, self-management, and self-motivation significantly contributed to predicting the OCD component. Additionally, positive belief about anxiety, cognitive confidence, maladaptive social threat magnification style, self-organization, and self-control were significant predictors of the compulsive disorder component.
&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Discussion and Conclusion&lt;/strong&gt;
This study examined obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) from a cognitive perspective, focusing on cognitive correlates such as maladaptive threat magnification style, executive functions, thought-action fusion, and metacognition. The results showed a positive and significant correlation at the 5% level between the positive belief component and uncontrollability, cognitive confidence, self-management, self-organization, self-control, and self-motivation at the 1% level. Higher levels of these cognitive components in the studied population were associated with a greater likelihood of experiencing OCD symptoms.
Furthermore, Pearson correlation analysis revealed significant positive correlations at the 5% level among cognitive correlates—maladaptive threat magnification style, executive functions, thought-action fusion, and metacognition—and OCD symptoms. Notably, positive belief, uncontrollability, need for control, maladaptive physical threat magnification style and self-organization showed significant correlations at both the 5% and 1% levels with cognitive confidence. Thus, the studied population is likely to exhibit symptoms of compulsive disorder.
These findings align with previous research (Mirza, Fisher, &amp; Wells, 2009; Irah &amp; Toussaint, 2008; Mohammadi, 2013). This study highlights the mediating role of predictor variables—positive belief, cognitive confidence, maladaptive social threat magnification style, self-organization, and self-control—in predicting the compulsive disorder component of obsessive-compulsive symptoms. These variables, thus, clarify the symptoms of OCD. Given their significant role, it is essential for university health authorities to implement training programs and mental health promotion strategies for students. Additionally, metacognitive beliefs and thought control strategies are crucial in predicting obsessive-compulsive symptoms, suggesting that metacognitive therapy and its techniques could be beneficial.
While the instruments used have scientific validity, they may have limitations in measuring certain variables. Due to restrictions, the cognitive assessment tool (Beshra test) was not administered; however, such tools could be valuable in future research. Diagnostic interviews, particularly for clinical groups, are also recommended.
&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;
&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;
&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;
 </Abstract>
			<OtherAbstract Language="FA">Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is one of the most common mental disorders, affecting all aspects of human life. In this study, 300 students from Azarbaijan Shahid Madani University participated through cluster sampling. The participants completed the Threat Magnification Maladaptive Style Questionnaire, the Barkley Deficits in Executive Functioning Scale, the Metacognition Assessment Questionnaire (30 items), the Thought-Action Fusion Questionnaire, and the Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale. The analysis revealed a significant positive correlation between positive beliefs about anxiety and components such as uncontrollability, confidence, self-management, self-control, and self-motivation, with statistical significance at the 1% level. Additionally, a positive and significant correlation was found between positive beliefs about anxiety, uncontrollability, the need for control, maladaptive style of physical threat magnification, and self-organization at the 5% level, and the cognitive component at the 1% level, with symptoms of obsessive-compulsive disorder. Regression analysis indicated that positive beliefs about anxiety, uncontrollability, self-management, and self-motivation significantly predicted the obsessive-compulsive disorder component. Moreover, the predictors of positive belief about anxiety, cognition, maladaptive style of social threat magnification, self-organization, and self-control significantly contributed to predicting obsessive-compulsive disorder component. Given importance of metacognitive beliefs and thought control strategies, influenced by metacognitive beliefs, metacognitive therapy may be useful in predicting and addressing obsessive-compulsive symptoms.
&lt;strong&gt;Introduction&lt;/strong&gt;
Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is characterized by obsessions, compulsions, or both. Obsessions are intrusive and distressing thoughts that persistently recur, often leading individuals to engage in compulsive actions to alleviate the distress (Jalal et al., 2023). Research shows that individuals with OCD, as well as non-clinical individuals with high OCD-related scores, exhibit significant cognitive biases. Cognitive models of OCD suggest that exaggerated evaluations of intrusive thoughts and a strong commitment to suppress them play a crucial role in distress and the urge to engage in behaviors such as compulsions, neutralizing actions, thought suppression, reassurance-seeking, and avoidance. When a heightened sense of vulnerability is triggered, it acts as a cognitive threat factor, making individuals more sensitive to danger cues and influencing their cognitive processes with a bias toward threat perception. Similar to other anxiety disorders, maladaptive threat magnification may heighten vulnerability to OCD by imposing a cognitive burden that undermines mental control abilities. Cognitive theory posits that cognitive processes are central to OCD (Jennings, 2022).
Literature indicates that individuals with high cognitive threat magnification are more susceptible to anxiety in stressful life events compared to those without this predisposition. However, a notable exception is the strong correlation between social and physical components of threat magnification in women compared to men (Gonzales Diez et al., 2014).
Thought-action fusion, a cognitive distortion, can be categorized into probability thought-action fusion and moral distortion (Einstein &amp; Menzies, 2004). Studies on probability and general thought-action fusion in clinical populations reveal high reliability in the general measure. Furthermore, strong links between general thought-action fusion and the probability subscales with OCD characteristics—relative to symptoms of depression and worry—have been confirmed (Myers &amp; Wells, 2013). Recent research has implicated neurological dysfunctions in OCD, including deficits in working memory and executive functions, which may play critical roles in the disorder&#039;s assessment and treatment (Bukhari, 2013). Individuals with OCD often exhibit impairments in cognitive control, cognitive flexibility, and inhibitory control.
Wells proposed a metacognitive theory of obsession that merges schema theory and information processing theory, highlighting beliefs individuals hold about their cognitive processes (McNicol &amp; Wells, 2012). A study found significant differences in metacognitive beliefs, thought control strategies, and anxiety-inducing thoughts among individuals with generalized anxiety disorder, OCD, dysthymia, and non-clinical individuals (Moin Al-Ghorabaiee et al., 2017).
The objective of this study was to address the question:
What role do cognitive correlates (specifically, predictors of maladaptive threat magnification style, executive functions, thought-action fusion, and metacognition) play in obsessive-compulsive disorder?
&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Methodology&lt;/strong&gt;
This study has a theoretical aim and employs a descriptive-correlational approach for data collection. The statistical population includes all students from Azarbaijan Shahid Madani University during the 2019-2020 academic year. A total of 300 participants were selected through cluster sampling. The following self-report questionnaires assessed maladaptive threat magnification style, executive functions, thought-action fusion, and metacognition in obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD): the Threat Magnification Self-Report Questionnaire, Barkley Deficits in Executive Functioning Scale, 30-item Metacognition Assessment Questionnaire, Thought-Action Fusion Questionnaire, and Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale. Data were analyzed using SPSS software at a significance level of (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&lt;0.05), and divided into descriptive and inferential sections. Descriptive measures of dispersion were used to characterize the research variables, while Pearson’s correlation coefficient and multiple regression analysis were utilized for inferential statistics.
 
&lt;strong&gt;Findings&lt;/strong&gt;
The sample comprised 193 females and 107 males, with 21 participants married and 279 single. Regarding education, 215 participants held bachelor&#039;s degrees, 70 ones had master&#039;s degrees, and 15 ones had doctoral degrees. Age distribution indicated that 68% were between 20-25 years and 32% between 30-35 years. Results showed that the skewness and kurtosis values for predictor and criterion variables suggested a normal distribution. Pearson correlation analysis revealed significant positive correlations between the positive belief component and components like uncontrollability, cognitive confidence, self-management, self-organization, self-control, and self-motivation. Furthermore, significant correlations existed between cognitive correlates (maladaptive threat magnification style, executive functions, thought-action fusion, and metacognition) and OCD symptoms, particularly in components of positive belief, uncontrollability, need for control, maladaptive physical threat magnification style, and self-organization with cognitive confidence. Regression analysis indicated that the predictor variables of positive belief about anxiety, uncontrollability, self-management, and self-motivation significantly contributed to predicting the OCD component. Additionally, positive belief about anxiety, cognitive confidence, maladaptive social threat magnification style, self-organization, and self-control were significant predictors of the compulsive disorder component.
&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Discussion and Conclusion&lt;/strong&gt;
This study examined obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) from a cognitive perspective, focusing on cognitive correlates such as maladaptive threat magnification style, executive functions, thought-action fusion, and metacognition. The results showed a positive and significant correlation at the 5% level between the positive belief component and uncontrollability, cognitive confidence, self-management, self-organization, self-control, and self-motivation at the 1% level. Higher levels of these cognitive components in the studied population were associated with a greater likelihood of experiencing OCD symptoms.
Furthermore, Pearson correlation analysis revealed significant positive correlations at the 5% level among cognitive correlates—maladaptive threat magnification style, executive functions, thought-action fusion, and metacognition—and OCD symptoms. Notably, positive belief, uncontrollability, need for control, maladaptive physical threat magnification style and self-organization showed significant correlations at both the 5% and 1% levels with cognitive confidence. Thus, the studied population is likely to exhibit symptoms of compulsive disorder.
These findings align with previous research (Mirza, Fisher, &amp; Wells, 2009; Irah &amp; Toussaint, 2008; Mohammadi, 2013). This study highlights the mediating role of predictor variables—positive belief, cognitive confidence, maladaptive social threat magnification style, self-organization, and self-control—in predicting the compulsive disorder component of obsessive-compulsive symptoms. These variables, thus, clarify the symptoms of OCD. Given their significant role, it is essential for university health authorities to implement training programs and mental health promotion strategies for students. Additionally, metacognitive beliefs and thought control strategies are crucial in predicting obsessive-compulsive symptoms, suggesting that metacognitive therapy and its techniques could be beneficial.
While the instruments used have scientific validity, they may have limitations in measuring certain variables. Due to restrictions, the cognitive assessment tool (Beshra test) was not administered; however, such tools could be valuable in future research. Diagnostic interviews, particularly for clinical groups, are also recommended.
&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;
&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;
&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;
 </OtherAbstract>
		<ObjectList>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Looming Maladaptive Style</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">executive function</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Thought-Action Fusion</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Metacognition</Param>
			</Object>
		</ObjectList>
<ArchiveCopySource DocType="pdf">https://cbs.ui.ac.ir/article_29255_bdb06897c83ddd881cfceca530b28d27.pdf</ArchiveCopySource>
</Article>

<Article>
<Journal>
				<PublisherName>University of Isfahan</PublisherName>
				<JournalTitle>Research in Cognitive and Behavioral Sciences</JournalTitle>
				<Issn>2251-7642</Issn>
				<Volume>14</Volume>
				<Issue>1</Issue>
				<PubDate PubStatus="epublish">
					<Year>2024</Year>
					<Month>08</Month>
					<Day>22</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</Journal>
<ArticleTitle>The Effectiveness of Emotion-Focused Therapy on Pain Anxiety and Resilience in Patients with Migraine</ArticleTitle>
<VernacularTitle>The Effectiveness of Emotion-Focused Therapy on Pain Anxiety and Resilience in Patients with Migraine</VernacularTitle>
			<FirstPage>151</FirstPage>
			<LastPage>170</LastPage>
			<ELocationID EIdType="pii">29313</ELocationID>
			
<ELocationID EIdType="doi">10.22108/cbs.2025.143860.1975</ELocationID>
			
			<Language>FA</Language>
<AuthorList>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Hamid Reza</FirstName>
					<LastName>Arab Bafrani</LastName>
<Affiliation>PhD Student of Health Psychology, Department of Health Psychology, Faculty of Medicine, Najafabad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Iran.</Affiliation>

</Author>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Hasan</FirstName>
					<LastName>Rezayi</LastName>
<Affiliation>Associate Professor of Health Psychology, Clinical Research Development Center, Najafabad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Iran.</Affiliation>
<Identifier Source="ORCID">0009-0000-4614-9028</Identifier>

</Author>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Ahmad</FirstName>
					<LastName>Sobhani</LastName>
<Affiliation>Assistant professor of Internal Medicine, Clinical Research Development Center, Najafabad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Iran.</Affiliation>

</Author>
</AuthorList>
				<PublicationType>Journal Article</PublicationType>
			<History>
				<PubDate PubStatus="received">
					<Year>2025</Year>
					<Month>01</Month>
					<Day>01</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</History>
		<Abstract>Migraine as one of the most common neurological disorders, significantly impacts the quality of life in affected individuals. This disorder is accompanied by severe and debilitating pain, which may stem from emotional and cognitive factors. This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of Emotion-focused Therapy (EFT) on pain anxiety and resilience in patients with migraine. The research employed a quasi-experimental design with a pretest, posttest, and a control group. Thirty patients with migraine were selected via convenience sampling and were randomly assigned to experimental and control groups. The experimental group received eight 90-minute sessions of EFT. Data were collected using the Pain Anxiety Scale (McCracken &amp; Dhingra, 2002) and the Resilience Scale (Connor &amp; Davidson, 2003) and analyzed via mixed variance analysis in SPSS-26. Results indicated a significant decrease in the mean scores of pain anxiety and a significant increase in the mean scores of resilience in the post-test and follow-up assessments (&lt;em&gt;p&lt;/em&gt; &lt; 0.05). Given the effectiveness of Emotion-focused Therapy on pain anxiety and resilience in patients with migraine, it is recommended that this therapy be utilized as a complementary intervention in migraine management.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Introduction&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Migraine, as one of the most common neurological disorders, affects approximately 14.4% of the global population and is associated with severe and debilitating headaches. This disorder, which is more prevalent in women, can be manifested in more severe forms such as chronic migraine or high-frequency migraine (di Cola et al., 2023). Research has shown that emotional and cognitive variables, particularly pain anxiety and resilience, play significant roles in the severity and disability caused by migraine (Crouch et al., 2024). Pain anxiety, as a future-oriented emotional state, involves negative cognitive and physiological responses that exacerbate pain intensity (Bishay et al., 2023). On the other hand, resilience, as the ability to adapt positively to stressful conditions, can reduce the severity of migraine attacks and improve patients&#039; quality of life (Vos et al., 2015).&lt;br /&gt;Emotion-focused therapy (EFT), as a psychotherapeutic approach based on deep emotional processing and restructuring attachment patterns, has demonstrated efficacy in reducing psychological issues such as anxiety, depression, and trauma (Elliott et al., 2013). Previous studies have confirmed the effectiveness of EFT and other psychological interventions, such as Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) and mindfulness, in alleviating symptoms associated with chronic headaches (Mousa Zadeh et al., 2023). However, no specific research has been found that examines the efficacy of EFT on pain anxiety and resilience in migraine patients.&lt;br /&gt;Given the high prevalence of migraine and its impact on individuals&#039; quality of life, this study was designed to investigate the efficacy of Emotion-focused Therapy on pain anxiety and resilience in patients with migraine.  This research aims to address the existing gap in the literature by providing new empirical evidence and offering effective therapeutic strategies for managing symptoms of this disorder.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Method&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;This quasi-experimental study employed a pretest-posttest design with a three-month follow-up. The statistical population included migraine patients visiting specialized clinics in Isfahan from 2023 to 2024. Thirty patients were selected based on inclusion criteria and randomly assigned equally to experimental and control groups. The sample size was calculated using GPower software, considering a power of 80% and a significance level of 0.05. Based on the mean and standard deviation reported in Yazdanfar et al.&#039;s study (2020) and accounting for approximately 10% sample attrition, the final sample size was estimated as 30 (15 in the control group and 15 in the experimental group).&lt;br /&gt;Data collection tools included the Pain Anxiety Questionnaire (McCracken &amp; Dhingra, 2002) and the Resilience Questionnaire (Connor &amp; Davidson, 2003). The Cronbach&#039;s alpha coefficient for pain anxiety in the present study was 0.91, and for resilience, it was 0.835. The intervention group received eight 90-minute group sessions of EFT based on Greenberg et al.&#039;s (2008) therapeutic package. To analyze the data, the normality of the distribution was assessed using the Shapiro-Wilk test. Mixed ANOVA was used to evaluate the efficacy of EFT on pain anxiety and resilience. Analyses were performed using SPSS version 26.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Findings&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The results indicated that EFT had a significant effect on pain anxiety and resilience in migraine patients. Specifically, the mean pain anxiety and resilience in the intervention group decreased and increased, respectively, in the post-test and follow-up, whereas no significant changes were observed in the control group (Table 1).&lt;br /&gt;The Shapiro-Wilk test confirmed the normal distribution of data in both groups across all assessment stages. Additionally, Levene&#039;s test indicated homogeneity of variances for the dependent variables between groups. Multivariate mixed ANOVA revealed significant differences in pain anxiety and resilience based on group, assessment time, and the interaction between group and assessment time (Table 2). These findings highlight the efficacy of EFT in reducing pain anxiety and enhancing resilience in migraine patients.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Table 1.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;em&gt; Mean and Standard Deviation of Pretest, Posttest, and Follow-up for the Variables of Anxiety, Pain, and Resilience.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Variable&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Group&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pretest&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Posttest&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Follow-up&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;M&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;SD&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;M&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;SD&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;M&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;SD&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pain Anxiety&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Emotion-Focused Therapy&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;49.8&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;4.05&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;40&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;4.71&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;34.1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;4.79&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Control Group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;50.3&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;4.32&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;49.8&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;4.24&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;49.6&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;4.15&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Resilience&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Emotion-Focused Therapy&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;63.6&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;6.77&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;69.7&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;4.99&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;69.2&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;5.03&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Control Group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;63.8&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;5.68&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;63.9&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;5.62&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;63.6&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;5.70&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;M: mean, SD: standard deviation&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Table 2.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;em&gt; Results of the Mixed Multivariate Analysis of Variance on Pain Anxiety and Resilience.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Source&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Test&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Value&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;F&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Hypothesis df&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Error df&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Sig.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Eta Squared&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Evaluation Time&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Pillai’s Trace&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.993&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;283.2&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;14&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;29&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.993&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Wilks’ Lambda&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.007&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;283.2&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;14&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;29&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.993&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Hotelling’s Trace&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;136.7&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;283.2&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;14&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;29&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.993&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Roy’s Largest Root&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;136.7&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;283.2&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;14&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;29&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.993&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Group Evaluation Time&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Pillai’s Trace&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.63&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;9.47&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;28&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;60&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.815&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Wilks’ Lambda&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.005&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;28.6&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;28&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;58&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.993&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Hotelling’s Trace&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;79.2&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;79.2&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;28&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;56&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.975&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Roy’s Largest Root&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;77.4&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;166.02&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;14&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;30&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.987&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Conclusion and Discussion&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The results of this study demonstrated that Emotion-focused Therapy (EFT) is significantly effective in reducing pain anxiety and enhancing resilience in patients with migraines. These findings align with previous studies that have shown the efficacy of EFT in reducing pain intensity, increasing resilience in patients with chronic headaches (Fathi et al., 2020), and alleviating pain anxiety in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (Yazdanfar et al., 2020). &lt;br /&gt;EFT, with its structured and phase-oriented approach, helps patients modify their emotional responses to pain by focusing on core emotional experiences and unmet attachment needs, enabling them to develop more adaptive coping strategies. This therapeutic process not only reduced pain-related anxiety but also assisted patients in moving beyond superficial emotions to access deeper emotional layers. By externalizing problems and addressing unmet emotions and needs during therapy sessions, patients were able to view their issues as separate from their identity and gain a better understanding of the emotional roots of their pain (Greenberg &amp; Goldman, 2019). Furthermore, EFT fostered a safe and supportive therapeutic relationship, helping patients identify and regulate negative emotions and create positive changes in emotional patterns. This process enhanced patients&#039; sense of security and control over their pain experience. &lt;br /&gt;The therapy sessions also helped patients develop a more positive self-image, improving their self-confidence, emotional self-regulation, and flexibility. This process not only strengthened their ability to manage emotional distress but also enhanced their sense of self-worth and empowerment. By increasing awareness of both positive and negative emotions, EFT facilitated the timely acceptance and expression of emotions, playing a significant role in boosting resilience (Amjadiyan et al., 2023). Ultimately, such dual aspects of EFT simultaneously helped patients reduce pain anxiety, enhance resilience, and cope more effectively with migraine-related challenges. &lt;br /&gt;Limitations of this study include the restricted sampling to Isfahan City, which limits the generalizability of the results. Additionally, confounding variables such as subcultures and socioeconomic conditions may have influenced the outcomes. It is recommended that EFT be integrated into conventional treatments as a multimedia educational program and adopted as part of public health education initiatives. Combining EFT with existing therapies could improve mental and physical health outcomes. Future research should investigate the long-term effects of EFT and its integration with other therapeutic methods.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;</Abstract>
			<OtherAbstract Language="FA">Migraine as one of the most common neurological disorders, significantly impacts the quality of life in affected individuals. This disorder is accompanied by severe and debilitating pain, which may stem from emotional and cognitive factors. This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of Emotion-focused Therapy (EFT) on pain anxiety and resilience in patients with migraine. The research employed a quasi-experimental design with a pretest, posttest, and a control group. Thirty patients with migraine were selected via convenience sampling and were randomly assigned to experimental and control groups. The experimental group received eight 90-minute sessions of EFT. Data were collected using the Pain Anxiety Scale (McCracken &amp; Dhingra, 2002) and the Resilience Scale (Connor &amp; Davidson, 2003) and analyzed via mixed variance analysis in SPSS-26. Results indicated a significant decrease in the mean scores of pain anxiety and a significant increase in the mean scores of resilience in the post-test and follow-up assessments (&lt;em&gt;p&lt;/em&gt; &lt; 0.05). Given the effectiveness of Emotion-focused Therapy on pain anxiety and resilience in patients with migraine, it is recommended that this therapy be utilized as a complementary intervention in migraine management.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Introduction&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Migraine, as one of the most common neurological disorders, affects approximately 14.4% of the global population and is associated with severe and debilitating headaches. This disorder, which is more prevalent in women, can be manifested in more severe forms such as chronic migraine or high-frequency migraine (di Cola et al., 2023). Research has shown that emotional and cognitive variables, particularly pain anxiety and resilience, play significant roles in the severity and disability caused by migraine (Crouch et al., 2024). Pain anxiety, as a future-oriented emotional state, involves negative cognitive and physiological responses that exacerbate pain intensity (Bishay et al., 2023). On the other hand, resilience, as the ability to adapt positively to stressful conditions, can reduce the severity of migraine attacks and improve patients&#039; quality of life (Vos et al., 2015).&lt;br /&gt;Emotion-focused therapy (EFT), as a psychotherapeutic approach based on deep emotional processing and restructuring attachment patterns, has demonstrated efficacy in reducing psychological issues such as anxiety, depression, and trauma (Elliott et al., 2013). Previous studies have confirmed the effectiveness of EFT and other psychological interventions, such as Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) and mindfulness, in alleviating symptoms associated with chronic headaches (Mousa Zadeh et al., 2023). However, no specific research has been found that examines the efficacy of EFT on pain anxiety and resilience in migraine patients.&lt;br /&gt;Given the high prevalence of migraine and its impact on individuals&#039; quality of life, this study was designed to investigate the efficacy of Emotion-focused Therapy on pain anxiety and resilience in patients with migraine.  This research aims to address the existing gap in the literature by providing new empirical evidence and offering effective therapeutic strategies for managing symptoms of this disorder.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Method&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;This quasi-experimental study employed a pretest-posttest design with a three-month follow-up. The statistical population included migraine patients visiting specialized clinics in Isfahan from 2023 to 2024. Thirty patients were selected based on inclusion criteria and randomly assigned equally to experimental and control groups. The sample size was calculated using GPower software, considering a power of 80% and a significance level of 0.05. Based on the mean and standard deviation reported in Yazdanfar et al.&#039;s study (2020) and accounting for approximately 10% sample attrition, the final sample size was estimated as 30 (15 in the control group and 15 in the experimental group).&lt;br /&gt;Data collection tools included the Pain Anxiety Questionnaire (McCracken &amp; Dhingra, 2002) and the Resilience Questionnaire (Connor &amp; Davidson, 2003). The Cronbach&#039;s alpha coefficient for pain anxiety in the present study was 0.91, and for resilience, it was 0.835. The intervention group received eight 90-minute group sessions of EFT based on Greenberg et al.&#039;s (2008) therapeutic package. To analyze the data, the normality of the distribution was assessed using the Shapiro-Wilk test. Mixed ANOVA was used to evaluate the efficacy of EFT on pain anxiety and resilience. Analyses were performed using SPSS version 26.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Findings&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The results indicated that EFT had a significant effect on pain anxiety and resilience in migraine patients. Specifically, the mean pain anxiety and resilience in the intervention group decreased and increased, respectively, in the post-test and follow-up, whereas no significant changes were observed in the control group (Table 1).&lt;br /&gt;The Shapiro-Wilk test confirmed the normal distribution of data in both groups across all assessment stages. Additionally, Levene&#039;s test indicated homogeneity of variances for the dependent variables between groups. Multivariate mixed ANOVA revealed significant differences in pain anxiety and resilience based on group, assessment time, and the interaction between group and assessment time (Table 2). These findings highlight the efficacy of EFT in reducing pain anxiety and enhancing resilience in migraine patients.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Table 1.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;em&gt; Mean and Standard Deviation of Pretest, Posttest, and Follow-up for the Variables of Anxiety, Pain, and Resilience.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Variable&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Group&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pretest&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Posttest&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Follow-up&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;M&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;SD&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;M&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;SD&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;M&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;SD&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Pain Anxiety&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Emotion-Focused Therapy&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;49.8&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;4.05&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;40&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;4.71&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;34.1&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;4.79&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Control Group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;50.3&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;4.32&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;49.8&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;4.24&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;49.6&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;4.15&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Resilience&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Emotion-Focused Therapy&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;63.6&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;6.77&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;69.7&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;4.99&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;69.2&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;5.03&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Control Group&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;63.8&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;5.68&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;63.9&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;5.62&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;63.6&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;5.70&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;M: mean, SD: standard deviation&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Table 2.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;em&gt; Results of the Mixed Multivariate Analysis of Variance on Pain Anxiety and Resilience.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Source&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Test&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Value&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;F&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Hypothesis df&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Error df&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Sig.&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Eta Squared&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Evaluation Time&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Pillai’s Trace&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.993&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;283.2&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;14&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;29&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.993&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Wilks’ Lambda&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.007&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;283.2&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;14&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;29&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.993&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Hotelling’s Trace&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;136.7&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;283.2&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;14&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;29&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.993&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Roy’s Largest Root&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;136.7&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;283.2&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;14&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;29&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.993&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Group Evaluation Time&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Pillai’s Trace&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1.63&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;9.47&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;28&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;60&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.815&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Wilks’ Lambda&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.005&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;28.6&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;28&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;58&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.993&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Hotelling’s Trace&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;79.2&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;79.2&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;28&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;56&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.975&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Roy’s Largest Root&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;77.4&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;166.02&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;14&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;30&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.001&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;0.987&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Conclusion and Discussion&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The results of this study demonstrated that Emotion-focused Therapy (EFT) is significantly effective in reducing pain anxiety and enhancing resilience in patients with migraines. These findings align with previous studies that have shown the efficacy of EFT in reducing pain intensity, increasing resilience in patients with chronic headaches (Fathi et al., 2020), and alleviating pain anxiety in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (Yazdanfar et al., 2020). &lt;br /&gt;EFT, with its structured and phase-oriented approach, helps patients modify their emotional responses to pain by focusing on core emotional experiences and unmet attachment needs, enabling them to develop more adaptive coping strategies. This therapeutic process not only reduced pain-related anxiety but also assisted patients in moving beyond superficial emotions to access deeper emotional layers. By externalizing problems and addressing unmet emotions and needs during therapy sessions, patients were able to view their issues as separate from their identity and gain a better understanding of the emotional roots of their pain (Greenberg &amp; Goldman, 2019). Furthermore, EFT fostered a safe and supportive therapeutic relationship, helping patients identify and regulate negative emotions and create positive changes in emotional patterns. This process enhanced patients&#039; sense of security and control over their pain experience. &lt;br /&gt;The therapy sessions also helped patients develop a more positive self-image, improving their self-confidence, emotional self-regulation, and flexibility. This process not only strengthened their ability to manage emotional distress but also enhanced their sense of self-worth and empowerment. By increasing awareness of both positive and negative emotions, EFT facilitated the timely acceptance and expression of emotions, playing a significant role in boosting resilience (Amjadiyan et al., 2023). Ultimately, such dual aspects of EFT simultaneously helped patients reduce pain anxiety, enhance resilience, and cope more effectively with migraine-related challenges. &lt;br /&gt;Limitations of this study include the restricted sampling to Isfahan City, which limits the generalizability of the results. Additionally, confounding variables such as subcultures and socioeconomic conditions may have influenced the outcomes. It is recommended that EFT be integrated into conventional treatments as a multimedia educational program and adopted as part of public health education initiatives. Combining EFT with existing therapies could improve mental and physical health outcomes. Future research should investigate the long-term effects of EFT and its integration with other therapeutic methods.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;</OtherAbstract>
		<ObjectList>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Emotion-Focused Therapy</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Pain Anxiety</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">resilience</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Migraine</Param>
			</Object>
		</ObjectList>
<ArchiveCopySource DocType="pdf">https://cbs.ui.ac.ir/article_29313_8e83faa94df0d1fea33947d1fac39cc6.pdf</ArchiveCopySource>
</Article>
</ArticleSet>
