Climbing Our Hills: A Beginning Conversation on the Comparison of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy and Traditional Cognitive Behavioral Therapy
Article first published online: 23 OCT 2008
© 2008 American Psychological Association
Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice
Volume 15, Issue 4, pages 286–295, December 2008
How to Cite
Hayes, S. C. (2008), Climbing Our Hills: A Beginning Conversation on the Comparison of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy and Traditional Cognitive Behavioral Therapy. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 15: 286–295. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2850.2008.00139.x
- Issue published online: 23 OCT 2008
- Article first published online: 23 OCT 2008
- Received December 10, 2007; accepted December 20, 2007.
- acceptance and commitment therapy;
- cognitive behavioral therapy;
- mediational analysis;
- processes of change;
- relational frame theory
The history and developmental program of acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) and relational frame theory (RFT) is described, and against that backdrop the target article is considered. In the authors’ comparison of ACT and traditional cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), traditional CBT does not refer to specific processes, principles, or theories but to a tribal tradition. Framed in that way, comparisons of ACT and CBT cannot succeed intellectually, because CBT cannot be pinned down. At the level of theory, change processes, and outcomes, ACT/RFT seems to be progressing as measured against its own goals.