Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-8r8nv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-08T18:31:54.076Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Some myths about cognitive-behaviour modification

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 June 2009

John S. Marzillier
John S. Marzillier
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Birmingham
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The integration of cognitive processes and behaviour change methods, generically known as cognitive-behaviour modification, has sparked off a series of heated arguments about the status of this hybrid (Greenspoon and Lamal, 1978; Ledwidge, 1978; 1979 (a); (b); Mahoney, 1974; 1977; Mahoney and Kazdin 1979; Meichenbaum 1977; 1979; Rachlin, 1977(a); (b); Wolpe, 1976; 1978). At the considerable risk of adding fuel to an already inflamed debate, I have drawn up a list of myths which the opposition to cognitive-behaviour modification has promulgated. Myths are, of course, a potent source of influence, and I am not at all sanguine that labelling the lines of opposition to cognitive-behaviour modification as ‘myths’ will change peoples' cognitions or behaviour. Nevertheless, in the interests of academic debate, and indeed in the pursuit of truth,* I have listed what seem to me to be the essential fallacies in the arguments against the cognitive-behavioural movement.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy , Volume 8 , Issue 2 , April 1980 , pp. 38 - 44
Copyright
Copyright © British Association for Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapies 1980

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Bandura, A. (1978). The self-system in reciprocal determinism. Amer. Psychol., 33, 344–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beck, A. T. (1970). Cognitive therapy: Nature and relation to behavior therapy. Behav. Ther., 1, 184–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brewer, W. F. (1974). There is no convincing evidence for operant or classical conditioning in adult humans. In Cognition and Symbolic Processes (Eds. Weimer, W. B. and Palermo, D. S.). Erlbaum: Hillside, New Jersey.Google Scholar
Cautela, J. R. & Baron, M. G. (1977). Covert conditioning: a theoretical analysis. Behav. Modification, 1, 351–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eysenck, H. J. (1978). Expectations as causal elements in behavioural change. Adv. Behav. Res. Ther., 1, 171–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eysenck, H. J. (1979). Behavior therapy and the philosophers. Behav. Res. Ther., 17, 511–514.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Greenspoon, J. & Lamal, P. A. (1978). Cognitive behavior modification — who needs it? Psychol. Record, 28, 343–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grings, W. W. (1973). Cognitive factors and conditioning: an overview. Psychophysiology, 10, 119–120.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heppner, P. P. (1978). The clinical alteration of covert thoughts: A critical review. Behav. Ther. 9, 717–734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kazdin, A. E. & Smith, G. A. (1979). Covert conditioning: A review and evaluation. Adv. Behav. Res. Ther. (in press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kazdin, A. E. & Wilson, G. T. (1978). Evaluation of Behavior Therapy. Ballinger: Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Ledwidge, B. (1978). Cognitive behavior modification — a step in the wrong direction. Psychol. Bull. 85, 353–375.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ledwidge, B. (1979(a)). Cognitive behavior modification or new ways to change minds: Reply to Mahoney and Kazdin. Psychol. Bull., 86, 1050–1053.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ledwidge, B. (1979(b)).Cognitive behavior modification: A rejoinder to Locke and Meichenbaum. Cog. Ther. Res., 3, 133–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Locke, E. A. (1971). Is “behavior therapy” behavioristic? (An analysis of Wolpe's psychotherapeutic methods). Psychol. Bull., 76, 318–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mahoney, M. J. (1974). Cognition and Behavior Modification. Ballinger: Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Mahoney, M. J. (1977). Reflections on the cognitive-learning trend in psychotherapy. Amer. Psychol., 32, 5–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mahoney, M. J. & Arnkoff, D. (1978). Cognitive and self-control therapies. In Handbook of Psychotherapy and Behavior Change. 2nd Edition. (Eds. Garfield, S. L. and Bergin, A. E.). Wiley: New York.Google Scholar
Mahoney, M. J. & Kazdin, A. E. (1979). Cognitive behavior modification: Misconceptions and premature evaluations. Psychol. Bull., 86, 1044–1049.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meichenbaum, D. (1977). Cognitive Behavior Modification: Plenum: New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meichenbaum, D. (1979). Cognitive behavior modification: The need for a fairer assessment. Cog. Ther. Res., 3, 127–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nisbett, R. E. & Wilson, T. D. (1977). Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. Psychol. Review, 84, 231–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rachlin, H. (1977(a)). Reinforcing and punishing thoughts. Behav. Ther., 8, 659–665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rachlin, H. (1977(b)). A review of M. J. Mahoney's Cognition and Behavior Modification. J. App. Behav. Anal., 10, 369–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, L. E. & Ross, S. M. (1976). Cognitive factors in classical conditioning. In Handbook of Learning and Cognitive Processes. Volume 3 (Ed. Estes, W. K.). Erlbaum: Hillside, New Jersey.Google Scholar
Seligman, M. E. P. & Hager, J. L. (Eds.) (1972). Biological Boundaries of Learning. Appleton-Century crofts: New York.Google Scholar
Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and Human Behavior. MacMillan: New York.Google Scholar
Skinner, B. F. (1974). About Behaviorism. Cape: London.Google Scholar
Wolpe, J. (1976). Behavior therapy and its malcontents. II Multimodal electicism, cognitive exclusivism and “exposure” empiricism. J. Behav. Ther. Exp. Psychiat., 7, 109–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolpe, J. (1978). Cognition and causation in human behavior and its therapy. Amer, Psychol., 35, 437–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.