Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-qsmjn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T21:57:13.974Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An Experimental Comparison of Techniques: Cognitive Defusion, Cognitive Restructuring, and in-vivo Exposure for Social Anxiety

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 February 2015

Terri L. Barrera ,
Derek D. Szafranski ,
Chelsea G. Ratcliff ,
Sarah L. Garnaat  and
Peter J. Norton
Terri L. Barrera*
Affiliation:
Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center, Houston, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, and South Central Mental Illness Research, Education and Clinical Center, Houston, USA
Derek D. Szafranski
Affiliation:
Ralph H. Johnson VA Medical Center, Charleston, USA
Chelsea G. Ratcliff
Affiliation:
University of Houston, USA
Sarah L. Garnaat
Affiliation:
Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, USA
Peter J. Norton
Affiliation:
Monash University, Australia
*
Reprint requests to Terri L. Barrera, VA HSR&D Houston Center of Excellence (MEDVAMC 152), 2002 Holcombe Boulevard, Houston, TX 77030, USA. E-mail: terrib@bcm.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background: One of the primary differences between Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) and Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) for anxiety is the approach to managing negative thoughts. CBT focuses on challenging the accuracy of dysfunctional thoughts through cognitive restructuring exercises, whereas ACT attempts to foster acceptance of such thoughts through cognitive defusion exercises. Previous research suggests that both techniques reduce the distress associated with negative thoughts, though questions remain regarding the benefit of these techniques above and beyond exposure to feared stimuli. Aims: In the present study, we conducted a brief experimental intervention to examine the utility of cognitive defusion + in-vivo exposure, cognitive restructuring + in-vivo exposure, and in-vivo exposure alone in reducing the impact of negative thoughts in patients with social anxiety disorder. Method: All participants completed a brief public speaking exposure and those in the cognitive conditions received training in the assigned cognitive technique. Participants returned a week later to complete a second exposure task and self-report measures. Results: All three conditions resulted in similar decreases in discomfort related to negative thoughts. ANOVA models failed to find an interaction between change in accuracy or importance and assignment to condition in predicting decreased distress of negative thoughts. Conclusions: These preliminary results suggest that changes in perceived importance and accuracy of negative thoughts may not be the mechanisms by which cognitive defusion and cognitive restructuring affect distress in the short-term.

Keywords

Cognitive defusioncognitive restructuringexposuresocial anxiety disorder
Type
Brief Clinical Report
Information
Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy , Volume 44 , Issue 2 , March 2016 , pp. 249 - 254
Copyright
Copyright © British Association for Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapies 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arch, J. J., Wolitzky-Taylor, K. B., Eiffert, G. H. and Craske, M. G. (2012). Longitudinal treatment mediation of traditional cognitive behavioral therapy and acceptance and commitment therapy for anxiety disorder. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 50, 469–478.Google Scholar
Deacon, B. J., Fawzy, T. I., Lickel, J. J. and Wolitzky-Taylor, K. B. (2011). Cognitive defusion versus cognitive restructuring in the treatment of negative self-referential thoughts: an investigation of process and outcome. Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy: An International Quarterly, 25, 218–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hope, D. A., Heimberg, R. G. and Turk, C. L. (2006). Managing Social Anxiety: a cognitive-behavioral therapy approach (therapist guide). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Longmore, R. J. and Worrell, M. (2007). Do we need to challenge thoughts in cognitive behavior therapy? Clinical Psychology Review, 27, 173–187.Google Scholar
Masuda, A., Hayes, S. C., Sackett, C. F. and Twohig, M. P. (2004). Cognitive defusion and self-relevant negative thoughts: examining the impact of a ninety year old technique. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 42, 477–485.Google Scholar
Wolpe, J. and Lazarus, A. A. (1967). Behavior Therapy Techniques: a guide to the treatment of neuroses. New York: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Barrera supplementary material

Barrera supplementary material 1

Download Barrera supplementary material(File)
File 33.2 KB
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.