[stopdog]

I thought this was a very interesting entry on this psych today blogger made.

Is What You?re Doing Really Psychotherapy? | Psychology Today.

I thought others might find it an interesting thing to think about.

Interesting, although my head is spinning trying to keep up with all the A's, B's, and C's. Felt like an algebra problem -- my worst nightmare.

[HazelGirl]

Interesting. I think this is an argument about semantics more than anything, though.

[sweepy62]

Omg good article if I were be able to follow it, too many a, b, c involved, my mind got stuck, so I will wait for somebodys interpretation.

I couldn't follow it either due to the letters and me possibly not being very smart.

[PeeJay]

It is poorly written and could be clearer.

Basically what the guy is saying (in a convoluted way) is that every feeling has an A, B, and C tied to it.

A is the action
C is the FEELING that we get from that action

And B is between - it is the belief that creates that feeling.

So, say that your boyfriend doesn't call you. The "C" is how you FEEL.

A = Boyfriend not calling
C = I am very upset because boyfriend didn't call?

Why? Because some belief is causing me to feel that. If I believe that boyfriend SHOULD call every day at 7 pm, I will be hurt.

An alternative is:

A- Boyfriend doesn't call
C - I feel fine about it

Well, that's because there's a different B in between.

Does that make better sense?

I think that his writing is not clear.

But I think the concept is interesting. Basically, real psychotherapy, according to this guy, means that you are exploring a persons beliefs, and that actions or feelings may change as a result.

Anyway, PuzzleBug, it has nothing to do with being smart. Good writing should be easy to follow.

[ListenMoreTalkLess]

Yawn fest. People see therapists for all kinds of reasons. Labeling them in different ways can sometimes be conceptual and interesting, or it can be useless, like naming different favors of jolly ranchers. I don't care if I'm doing psychotherapy, but I am pleased with how what I am doing is affecting me.

Originally Posted by PeeJay

It is poorly written and could be clearer.

Basically what the guy is saying (in a convoluted way) is that every feeling has an A, B, and C tied to it.

A is the action
C is the FEELING that we get from that action

And B is between - it is the belief that creates that feeling.

So, say that your boyfriend doesn't call you. The "C" is how you FEEL.

A = Boyfriend not calling
C = I am very upset because boyfriend didn't call?

Why? Because some belief is causing me to feel that. If I believe that boyfriend SHOULD call every day at 7 pm, I will be hurt.

An alternative is:

A- Boyfriend doesn't call
C - I feel fine about it

Well, that's because there's a different B in between.

Does that make better sense?

I think that his writing is not clear.

But I think the concept is interesting. Basically, real psychotherapy, according to this guy, means that you are exploring a persons beliefs, and that actions or feelings may change as a result.

Anyway, PuzzleBug, it has nothing to do with being smart. Good writing should be easy to follow.

Thanks for the Cliff's notes, but it still reads like a bad algebra word problem. (Can you tell this English teacher mother was helping her son with his algebra homework last night? Ack!)

[HazelGirl]

To add onto PeeJay, he is saying that psychotherapy that only focuses on what happens around you (the "A" or action), or therapy that only focuses on your response (the "C" or consequence) isn't as effective or as good at helping you. True psychotherapy should focus on your beliefs and interpretations of situations (the "B" or between).

For example:
You're 24. Your mother calls you and yells at you about wrecking your car (A). You feel angry as a result (C). You feel angry because it was an accident and you are an adult who should not be yelled at by your mother, and you also hate how much control she tries to have in your life (B).

Therapies can focus on:
- A: Your mother yelled at you. So in order to make sure that doesn't happen again, maybe you could cut ties with her. Problem solved.
- C: Try to find a way to tolerate her yelling and calm yourself down so that it doesn't make you angry anymore. Maybe venting to a friend, going for a walk, or writing about it, or even yelling back. Problem solved because she doesn't bother you anymore.
- B: Spend time figuring out why she bothers you so much, and uncover the fact that she has always been controlling and blaming. Work on the beliefs and thoughts activated by that and similar situations to reduce future response to similar situations.

So, is there any particular reason we need to classify how we approach an issue as A, B, or C? I suppose intellectually it might be interesting, but I'm not sure I see why it is important. Seemed like the writer was anti anything but B, but I may have misunderstood that as I waded through all the algebra.

[HazelGirl]

Originally Posted by 1914sierra

So, is there any particular reason we need to classify how we approach an issue as A, B, or C? I suppose intellectually it might be interesting, but I'm not sure I see why it is important. Seemed like the writer was anti anything but B, but I may have misunderstood that as I waded through all the algebra.

Nope. You didn't misunderstand. I get the impression the author was strong on the psychoanalytic approach.

Originally Posted by HazelGirl

Nope. You didn't misunderstand. I get the impression the author was strong on the psychoanalytic approach.

Sounds like black and white thinking to me . . .

[HazelGirl]

Originally Posted by 1914sierra

Sounds like black and white thinking to me . . .

Very much so

[PeeJay]

Originally Posted by 1914sierra

So, is there any particular reason we need to classify how we approach an issue as A, B, or C? I suppose intellectually it might be interesting, but I'm not sure I see why it is important. Seemed like the writer was anti anything but B, but I may have misunderstood that as I waded through all the algebra.

It's easy to remember, and therefore easy to teach to people.

ABC = Action, Belief, Consequence (feeling)

You have a whole population of people who aren't psych-educated, and maybe not self-aware.

So this let's people break down events and pause, so that they can become more self aware.

I liked Hazel's example.

I had never heard of this ABC concept in my own therapy, but we do focus on all three things. Exploring my beliefs have been very helpful.

Here's an example from my own life.

Action: My spouse gets angry with me, and then gets over it within minutes
Consequence: I brood for days (months!) and want to escape and plot divorce

Well, through therapy, I have learned that my "belief system," or filter, is one where people close to me hurt me and that anger in the household leads to abuse. And so, I feel trapped and scared, even though it is normal for spouses to get angry at each other from time to time.

I really needed to understand my own filter before I could even begin to work on changing my reaction.

[Willowleaf]

I quite liked it. It made me think about our focus in therapy.

[elliemay]

Originally Posted by stopdog

I thought this was a very interesting entry on this psych today blogger made.

Is What You?re Doing Really Psychotherapy? | Psychology Today.

I thought others might find it an interesting thing to think about.

yeah, just not into that kind of thing. A this, B that.

Am I doing psychotherapy? Didn't get an answer out of that blog. However, unless it's humor, I usually don't get a lot out of blogs anyway.

[stopdog]

I read the blog as having an answer. But I like A,B,C sorts of explanations. Or Whiteacre and Blackacre. And X, Y, and Z.
I am not saying I agree, but I did understand it and found it interesting.

We are doing this at the moment in college, pure cbt. It makes a lot of sense for some clients but not for others.
Peejay does a great job of explaining but we were thought the c is not feelings it is the consequence!
So for example, a husband has been working late all week and forgot about his wives birthday( this is the action)
The wife feels unloved and forgotten about( the belief) she then gets very upset and angry at him but doesn't tell him why and he in turn gets angry back and a heavy argument follows( consequence)

In cbt, you would ask the wife why she didn't just communicate that he had not got her a birthday present, or perhaps he had and just forgot to give it to her! She falls into the "awfulisation" trap and automatically assumes the worst.

It would be hard not to feel unloved if something like that happened but instead of her being passive aggressive it might have helped to clearly communicate her anger so the situation could be rectified!

A psychotherapist would explore her feelings and anger and try to find out if they are projected from a past event, perhaps her mom forgot a birthday before and this is triggering some unresolved feelings from the past.

I don't think people realise how important it is to ask your therapist what theory they follow or what method they practise as there is so many and not every method will suit every client.
Cbt will only work with certain behavioural problems

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[blur]

it's an interesting article. i believe it is actually REBT (rational emotive behavior therapy) developed by albert ellis who is considered the grandfather of CBT. i bought a book that i thought was on emotions and it is all this ABC stuff. at first it is a bit overwhelming to understand but actually makes a bit of sense. admittedly, i didn't read too much of the book as it is such a reductive approach.

the author of the article seems to be saying that it is better to go deeper & broader than just a single belief concerning a present problem and look at the past events that created this belief and all the concomitant emotions, patterns, etc that also contributed. i think he probably thinks just trying to change the activating event or consequences or even the belief itself without looking at its origins and dealing with the original event is not that helpful.

i think something like these ABCs are good at giving some handles to deal with a present problem but more helpful if combined with the deeper work. there are reasons why people believe their irrational beliefs and i think getting to the root of those reasons is necessary for some to actually change the belief rather than just saying it's wrong so believe this other thing instead. using the ABCs can be a great starting place though to get to the root.

[msxyz]

I find it hard to believe that any given therapist strictly does things one way only. Nevermind, I take that back, it doesn't make sense to me to be a one trick pony but after reading some on the forum I know they do exist.

[Lauliza]

Originally Posted by Akama

I find it hard to believe that any given therapist strictly does things one way only. Nevermind, I take that back, it doesn't make sense to me to be a one trick pony but after reading some on the forum I know they do exist.

I agree. While I understand every person is going to have a preference certain approaches over others, I also can't quite wrap my brain around the thought of following only one approach. My therapist specializes in DBT and I've done some DBT work over the years, most of my therapy has been a cocktail of CBT, DBT, upportive, etc. Unless you only want to work with a narrow population, I can't imagine using only one.

[owlpride]

Originally Posted by monalisasmile

We are doing this at the moment in college, pure cbt. It makes a lot of sense for some clients but not for others.

Originally Posted by blur

it's an interesting article. i believe it is actually REBT (rational emotive behavior therapy) developed by albert ellis who is considered the grandfather of CBT.

While the author of the article uses Ellis' terminology (the ABC stuff), his position seems to be rather different. "B therapies" advocated for by the article would be purely cognitive, like pure-form cognitive therapy or insight-oriented psychodynamic/psychoanalytic work. While Ellis is also concerned about maladaptive cognitions, the cornerstone of his position is that cognitive insight alone rarely leads to change. Hence therapy should combine cognitive, behavioral and emotive interventions.

The behavioral interventions of CBT also don't fit into the blog author's framework. They'd be "A" or "C" therapies.

I do agree with the author that the term "psychotherapy" should be reserved for therapies that contain some amount of "B" work, but I don't think they need to be B-only therapies. Managing symptoms or creating a safer living environment can be important aspects of good therapy. I just struggle to think of symptom-management alone (e.g. mindfulness exercises and medication) or environmental change alone as "psychotherapy."

I couldn't keep up with all the A's B's and C's, I was starting to get headache, When my head feels right I might try and read.