Grappling with the Complexity of Behavioral Processes in Human Psychological Suffering: Some Potential Insights from Relational Frame Theory
Tóm tắt
Relational frame theory (RFT) has historically been considered the basic explanatory science behind acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT). However, some have argued that there has been an increasing separation between the two in recent years. The primary aim of the current article is to explore the extent to which RFT concepts, particularly those that have been proposed recently in the context of “up-dating” the theory, may be used to build stronger links between basic and applied behavior analyses in which there is a shared language of relatively precise technical terms. As an example of this strategy, we outline RFT process-based experimental and conceptual analyses of the impact of one of the most widely used sets of interventions employed in the ACT literature, defusion. In addition, we suggest a potential experimental methodology for analyzing the basic behavioral processes involved. Overall, the current article should be seen as part of a broader research agenda that aims to explore how RFT may be used to provide a functional-analytic abstractive treatment of the behavioral processes involved in human psychological suffering.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Assaz, D. A., Roche, B., Kanter, J. W., & Oshiro, C. K. B. (2018). Cognitive defusion in acceptance and commitment therapy: What are the basic processes of change. The Psychological Record, 68, 405–418. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-017-0254-z
Assaz, D. A., Tyndall, I., Oshiro, C. K. B., & Roche, B. (2022). A process-based analysis of cognitive defusion in acceptance and commitment therapy. Behaviour Therapy. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2022.06.003
Ayduk, Ö., & Kross, E. (2008). Enhancing the pace of recovery: Self-distanced analysis of negative experiences reduces blood pressure reactivity. Psychological Science, 19, 229–231. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02073.x
Barnes-Holmes, Y. (2001). Analysing relational frames: Studying language and cognition in young children [Unpublished doctoral thesis, National University of Ireland Maynooth].
Barnes-Holmes, D., & Harte, C. (2022a). Relational frame theory 20 years on: The Odysseus voyage and beyond. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behaviour, 117(2), 240–266. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.733
Barnes-Holmes, D., & Harte, C. (2022b). The IRAP as a measure of implicit cognition: A case of Frankenstein’s monster. Perspectives on Behaviour Science, 45, 559–578. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-022-00352-z
Barnes-Holmes, D., Barnes-Holmes, Y., Power, P., Hayden, E., Milne, R., & Stewart, I. (2006). Do you really know what you believe? Developing the IRAP as a direct measure of implicit beliefs. The Irish Psychologist, 7(32), 169–177.
Barnes-Holmes, D., Barnes-Holmes, Y., Stewart, I., & Boles, S. (2010). A sketch of the implicit relational assessment procedure (IRAP) and relational elaboration and coherence (REC) model. The Psychological Record, 60, 527–542. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03395726
Barnes-Holmes, Y., Hussey, I., McEnteggart, C., Barnes-Holmes, Y., & Foody, M. (2016). Scientific ambition: The relationship between relational frame theory and middle-level terms in acceptance commitment therapy. In R. D. Zettle, S. C. Hayes, D. Barnes-Holmes, & A. Biglan (Eds.), The Wiley handbook of contextual behavioural science (pp. 365–382). Wiley-Blackwell.
Barnes-Holmes, D., Barnes-Holmes, Y., Luciano, C., & McEnteggart, C. (2017). From IRAP and REC model to a multi-dimensional multi-level framework for analysing the dynamics of arbitrarily applicable relational responding. Journal of Contextual Behavioural Science, 6(4), 473–483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2017.08.001
Barnes-Holmes, D., Barnes-Holmes, Y., & McEnteggart, C. (2020a). Updating RFT (more field than frame) and its implications for process-based therapy. The Psychological Record, 70, 605–624. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-019-00372-3
Barnes-Holmes, D., Harte, C., & McEnteggart, C. (2020b). Implicit cognition and social behaviour. In M. Fryling, R. A. Rehfeldt, J. Tarbox, & L. J. Hayes (Eds.), Applied behaviour analysis of language and cognition (pp. 264–280). Context Press.
Barnes-Holmes, D., Barnes-Holmes, Y., McEnteggart, C., & Harte, C. (2021). Back to the future with an up-dated version of RFT: More field than frame? Perspectivas em Análise do Comportamento, 12(1), 33–51. https://doi.org/10.18761/PAC.2021.v12RFT.03
Bern, R., Persdotter, T., Harte, C., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2021). Relational coherence and persistent rule-following: The impact of targeting coherence in a “non-critical” component of a relational network. The Psychological Record, 71, 279–290. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-020-00414-1
Blackledge, J. T. (2007). Disrupting verbal processes: Cognitive defusion in acceptance and commitment therapy and other mindfulness-based therapies. The Psychological Record, 57(4), 555–576. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03395595
Delabie, M., Cummins, J., Finn, M., & De Houwer, J. (2022). Differential Crel and Cfunc acquisition through stimulus pairing. Journal of Contextual Behavioural Science, 24, 112–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2022.03.012
Dymond, S., & Roche, B. (2013). Advances in relational frame theory: Research and application. New Harbinger.
Finn, M., & De Houwer, J. (2021). The selective action of Cfunc control. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behaviour, 116(3), 314–331. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.717
Finn, M., Barnes-Holmes, D., & McEnteggart, C. (2018). Exploring the single-trial-type-dominance-effect on the IRAP: Developing a differential arbitrarily applicable relational responding effects (DAARRE) model. The Psychological Record, 68(1), 11–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-017-0262-z
Gloster, A. T., Walder, N., Levin, M. E., Twohig, M. P., & Karekla, M. (2020). The empirical status of acceptance and commitment therapy: A review of meta-analyses. Journal of Contextual Behavioural Science, 18, 181–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2020.09.009
Gomes, C., Perez, W., de Almeida, J., Ribeiro, A., de Rose, J., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2019). Assessing a derived transformation of functions using the implicit relational assessment procedure under three motivative conditions. The Psychological Record, 69, 487–497. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-019-00353-6
Harte, C. & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2021a, March 29). Wherever I “ROE-M”, there I am: An RFT (technical) analysis of the verbal self and altered states of consciousness. Association of Behavior Analysis International. https://science.abainternational.org/wherever-i-roe-m-there-i-am-an-rft-technical-account-of-the-verbal-self-and-altered-states-of-consciousness/louise-mchughucd-ie/
Harte, C., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2021b). A primer on relational frame theory (RFT). In M. P. Twohig, M. E. Levin, & J. M. Peterson (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of acceptance and commitment therapy. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780197550076.013.4
Harte, C., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2022). The status of rule-governed behaviour as pliance, tracking and augmenting within relational frame theory: Middle-level rather than technical terms. The Psychological Record, 72, 145–158. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-021-00458-x
Hayes, S. C., Strosahl, K., & Wilson, K. G. (1999). Acceptance and commitment therapy: An experiential approach to behaviour change. Guilford Press.
Hayes, S. C., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Roche, B. (2001). Relational frame theory: A post-Skinnerian account of human language and cognition. Plenum.
Hayes, S. C., Luoma, J. B., Bond, F. W., Masuda, A., & Lillis, J. (2006). Acceptance and commitment therapy: Model, processes and out- comes. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 44, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2005.06.006
Hayes, S. C., Strosahl, K., & Wilson, K. G. (2011). Acceptance and commitment therapy: The process and practice of mindful change (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.
Hayes, S. C., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Wilson, K. (2012). Contextual behavioural science: Creating a science more adequate to the challenge of the human condition. Journal of Contextual Behavioural Science, 1(1–2), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2012.09.004
Hayes, S. C., Hofmann, S. G., & Ciarrochi, J. (2020). A process-based approach to psychological diagnosis and treatment: The conceptual and treatment utility of an extended evolutionary meta model. Clinical Psychology Review, 82, Article 101908. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2020.101908
Harte, C., Barnes-Holmes, D., Barnes-Holmes, Y., & McEnteggart, C. (2021a). Exploring the impact of coherence (through the presence versus absence of feedback) and levels of derivation on persistent rule-following. Learning & Behaviour, 49, 222–239. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13420-020-00438-1
Harte, C., Barnes-Holmes, D., Moreira, M., de Almeida, J. H., Aparecida-Passarelli, D., & de Rose, J. C. (2021b). Exploring a Training IRAP as a single participant context for analysing reversed derived relations and persistent rule-following. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behaviour, 115(2), 460–480. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.671
Hofmann, S. G., & Hayes, S. C. (2019). The future of intervention science: Process-based therapy. Clinical Psychological Science, 7(1), 37–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167702618772296
Hofmann, S. G., Hayes, S. C., & Lorscheid, D. N. (2021). Learning process-based therapy: A skills training manual for targeting the core processes of psychological change in clinical practice. Context Press.
Kishita, N., Muto, T., Ohtsuki, T., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2014). Measuring the effect of cognitive defusion using the implicit relational assessment procedure: An experimental analysis with a highly socially anxious sample. Journal of Contextual Behavioural Science, 3(1), 8–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2013.12.001
Maloney, E., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2016). Exploring the behavioural dynamics of the implicit relational assessment procedure: The role of relational contextual cues versus relational coherence indicators as response options. The Psychological Record, 66, 395–403. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-016-0180-5
McHugh, L., Barnes-Holmes, Y., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2004). Perspective-taking as relational responding: A developmental profile. The Psychological Record, 54, 115–144. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03395465
Mischkowski, D., Kross, E., & Bushman, B. J. (2012). Flies on the wall are less aggressive: Self-distancing “in the heat of the moment” reduces aggressive thoughts, angry feelings and aggressive behaviour. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 1187–1191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2012.03.012
Nickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2(2), 175–220. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.2.2.175
O’Connor, M., Farrell, L., Munnelly, A., & McHugh, L. (2017). Citation analysis of relational frame theory: 2009–2016. Journal of Contextual Behavioural Science, 6(2), 152–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2017.04.009
Perez, W. F., Fidalgo, A. P., Kovac, R., & Nico, Y. C. (2015). The transfer of Cfunc contextual control through equivalence relations. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behaviour, 103(3), 511–523. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.150
Perez, W. F., Kovac, R., Nico, Y. C., Caro, D. M., Fidalgo, A. P., Linares, I., de Almeida, J. H., & de Rose, J. C. (2017). The transfer of Crel contextual control (same, opposite, less than, more than) through equivalence relations. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behaviour, 108(3), 318–334. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.284
Perez, W. F., de Azevedo, S. P., Gomes, C. T., & Vichi, C. (2021). Equivalence relations and the contextual control of multiple derived stimulus functions. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behaviour, 115(1), 405–420. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.649
Pinto, J. A. R., de Almeida, R. V., & Bortoloti, R. (2020). The stimulus’ orienting function may play an important role in IRAP performance: Supportive evidence from an eye-tracking study of brands. The Psychological Record, 70, 257–266. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-020-00378-2
Rachlin, H. (2006). Notes on discounting. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behaviour, 85, 425–435. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2006.85-05
Ritzert, T. R., Forsyth, J. P., Berghoff, C. R., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Nicholson, E. (2015). The impact of a cognitive defusion intervention on behavioural and psychological flexibility: An experimental evaluation in a spider fearful non-clinical sample. Journal of Contextual Behavioural Science, 4(2), 112–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2015.04.001
Sidman, M. (1971). Reading and auditory-visual equivalences. Journal of Speech, Language, & Hearing Research, 14, 5–13. https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.1401.05
Sidman, M. (1994). Equivalence relations and behaviour: A research story. Authors Cooperative.
Sidman, M., & Tailby, W. (1982). Conditional discrimination vs. matching to sample: An expansion of the testing paradigm. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behaviour, 37(1), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1982.37-5
Stewart, I., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2004). Relational frame theory and analogical reasoning: Empirical investigations. International Journal of Psychology and Psychological Therapy, 4, 241–262.
Tryon, W. W. (2005). Possible mechanisms for why desensitization and exposure therapy work. Clinical Psychology Review, 25(1), 67–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2004.08.005
Zapparoli, H. B., Marin, R., & Harte, C. (2021). Rule-governed behaviour: An ongoing RFT-based operant analysis. Perspectivas em Análise do Comportamento, 12(1), 197–213. https://doi.org/10.18761/PAC.2021.v12.RFT.09