I wonder whether there are scholarly attempts to compare the ABC (Activating Event, Belief, Consequence) framework in Cognitive (Behavioral) Therapies with the ABC (Antecedent, Behavior, Consequences) framework in psychotherapeutic applications of Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA)? This question sounds somewhat silly given that the Cognitive school emerged as a critique of "hard" behaviorism in the historical context. But the question seems relevant given that there is an upgraded behaviorism (which incorporated RFT for instance). I have some ideas yet want to discover whether the question is already addressed somewhere.
Dear Kaya,
I need to learn from you. In the ABC model, what does belief comprises of? can I conceptualize beliefs as cognitive and affective minds? Request and appreciate your help.
Best Regards,
Jasman
As far as I am concerned, beliefs in the cognitive therapy frameworks is predominantly cognitive evaluations, comparisons and propositions (or simply internal speech) about self, others and the world. Affective resposes are usually envisioned as distinct outcomes. Here is a basic intro to the ABC model of CBT.
http://www.davidbonham-carter.com/abcmodelcbt.html
The "ABC" parallel is meaningless. It's just easy to use the first letters of the alphabet as an acronym. However, in both cases "A" refers to that which precedes and causes some sort of reaction.
You can place both "ABC" models on the SORC sequence, though of course that one isn't as "pretty."
S = Stimulus. Same as Antecedent or Activating Event
O = Organism (anything happening inside the creature being observed). This has no parallel in the radical behavioral ABC model, which views the mind as a "black box." In the cognitive system, it would include Beliefs.
R = Response. Same as Behavior. Most of the Consequences in the cognitive model would correspond to this. If, for example, I respond to my belief that I am unlovable by avoiding school dances. Or if I respond to my belief that I cannot survive a situation by developing intense fear, accelerated heart rate, etc.
C = Consequences. Same as consequences in the behavioral model. Some of the Consequences in the cognitive model might correspond to this. But the main focus is on reinforcing and punishing outcomes.
Dear Professor Dr Stephen Joy,
Thank you for sharing with us.
Regards,
Jasman
While 'hard' behaviourism disregarded the mind/thoughts/beliefs, the cognitive element added it in; that's why it is Cognitive Behaviour Therapy. The cognitive element mediates the responses; for example, exposure therapy was supposed to work through habituation, but often clients use cognitive avoidance while in the anxiety-provoking situation, and so never habituate.
The functional analysis I use is an ABC-ABC model:
Activating event - Behaviour - Consequence
|
Autonomic, Behaviour, Cognitive
(I hope that retains the formatting!) So the Autonomic/Beh/Cog is a subsystem of behavioural responses, and only has those names to keep with the acronym: it encompasses Emotions & their physiological manifestations under the Autonomic heading. Cognitive includes thoughts, beliefs, imagery, memories. And all served on a bed of environment!
There is a bit of a danger that CBT will lose its B, but there are researchers who are supportive of attempts to bring it back. Will have a look at my files, but I have a memory of a lecturer from either the Netherlands or Belgium giving a keynote on this at one of the EABCT conferences, I think in Amsterdam... or was it Geneva? It was Dirk Hermans, from KU Leuven, giving a keynote in 2014.
ACT (Acceptance & Commitment Therapy), a third-wave CBT therapy, is heavily based on Relational Frame Theory.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Psychology