Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

Pain: Cognitive and Contextual Influences

Recent pain research has been greatly influenced by the gate control model of pain presented in 1967 by psychologist Ronald Melzack and neuro-scientist Patrick Wall. They suggested that both physiological and clinical data, as well as everyday experience, run counter to the classical view that pain simply arises from overstimulation of the somatosensory system. Anatomical, physiological, and psychological evidence point to a complex interaction of both peripheral and central information in responding to noxious stimuli.

Melzack and Wall also noted that the amount of pain after an injury is greatly influenced by contextual factors. An athlete, soldier, or worker may suffer a severe wound yet not report pain until long after the event, likely because the individual's attention was focused upon some vital task when the injury occurred.

The gate control theory, emphasizing parallel ascending and descending effects within the nervous system, suggested that pain is not a single sensation. Rather, it has several distinct dimensions that Melzack and Kenneth Casey called (1) the sensory-discriminative system, (2) the motivational-affective system, and (3) the cognitive-evaluative system. Put simply, the first deals with identifying the location and intensity of the pain (how it feels), the second with our emotional response to that sensation (how it makes us feel), and the third with our interpretation and response to that event (how we think about it and act).

Consequently, pain research and management must deal with sensory, emotional, and cognitive mechanisms. This is reflected in pain measurement techniques, in functional imaging studies, in medical interventions, and in psychological approaches to pain reduction. This entry discusses some of the techniques used to measure pain, behavioral measures that illustrate how pain is influenced by cognition, and how pain is influenced by context effects.

Pain Measurement

Melzack and Warren Torgerson studied the basic dimensions of pain through an analysis of the English language. They came up with a list of 102 adjectives commonly used to describe elements of the pain experience. A group of subjects were asked to place these terms into categories, yielding three major classes. The classes were words that described the sensory qualities of the experience (such as their temporal, spatial, and thermal characteristics), the affective qualities (words such as tiring, frightful, or wretched), and evaluative ones that descried the overall character of the pain experience (such as annoying, miserable, or unbearable).

These terms were scaled for their intensity or severity, and an instrument called the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ) was developed to measure the overall pain impression as well as its distinct components. The MPQ (now translated into more than 20 languages) has become widely used both for pain assessment (measuring, for example, changes in score after treatment) as well as diagnosis (because certain terms are used much more often by individuals suffering from one pain syndrome or another).

Words, of course, are only one means by which people can describe their level of pain or suffering. Numbers are another method; marks along a line (the visual analog scale) are a third. Richard Gracely devised several scales in which individuals were asked to report their pain intensity and distress separately. Although it is generally the case that increases in intensity are accompanied by increases in unpleasantness, that is not always so. Researchers sometimes remind people being asked to rate the two components that soft music that they dislike is likely to be markedly more unpleasant than loud music performed by a favorite band.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading