COGNITIVE THERAPY 4
Running head: COGNITIVE THERAPY 1
Cognitive Therapy
Name
Institution of Affiliation
Cognitive Therapy
There are various counselling approaches in contemporary society which have their strengths, biases, and limitations. The leading theory is the Cognitive Behavior therapy (CBT) which is an active, regulated and mandated structured method that counsellors utilise to treat clients with psychiatric issues (Butler, Chapman, Forman & Beck, 2006). CBT functions by interrelating both behavioural and cognitive methods. The therapeutic intervention in CBT involves the collaboration of the counsellor and the client to overcome challenges by identifying and reorganising negative emotions, attitudes and automatic thoughts.
A key strength of cognitive therapy is that it includes a significant amount of empirical evidence to support its efficiency when negotiating various psychiatric disorders. According to Beck & Carlson (2006, p. 474), CBT is the most recommended therapy by the National Health Service (NHS) because of its uniqueness and its psychotherapy system consists of an affiliated theory of psychopathology and personality supported by considerable empirical evidence.
Strength is that CBT is an ordinance approach that implements perpetuity therapy sessions and deliberate plans carried out by the counselor. However, a significant bias of the CBT is the assumption that the counselor is proficient and has high expertise on how to deal with the client’s issue, which may not apply for every client.
Cognitive therapy has been recommended for being straightforward and uncomplicated for clients to comprehend and implement. However CBT case compositions are prone to biases and prejudices of the counsellor thus the therapist may create a perfect, complex and applicable theory that has little pragmatic equivalent and empirical evidence to the client because of the therapist’s cognitive misrepresentation (Hofmann, Asnaani, Vonk, Sawyer & Fang, 2012). Another limitation to CBT is its reliance on simple procedures within its theory for example schemas which experience controversy and dispute concerning their existence.
When dealing with resistant or non-compliant clients, it is the counsellor’s responsibility to understand the client’s perspective to the degree that they view the reason for the client’s behaviour. Sometimes clients become resistant because the counsellor asks them to deal with an uncomfortable issue. Counsellors need to relate with their clients to identify the right problem, leading to self-disclosure.
The concept of counsellor’s power and client’s vulnerability helps to establish balance in cognitive therapy. The therapist should maintain professionalism to handle the concepts of transference, clients’ dependence and vulnerability and power algorithm (Butler et al., 2006). Because of the imbalance of dynamism between the counsellor and the client, the patient may not adequately make rational decisions for their best interest such as professional growth.
The counsellor should maintain confidentiality at all circumstances except in different incidences whereby there is an immediate threat to the client’s safety or a situation that forces the therapist to report to the authority under state or federal law.
The validity and effectiveness of CBT for anxiety conditions is continually strong despite significant divergence in the precise anxiety severity degree, comparison situation, pathology and follow-up information (Beck & Carlson, 2006). CBT is significantly more valid and sufficient for bulimia compared to other psychotherapy forms. There is some evidence for validity and effectiveness of CBT for personality conditions than other psychosocial interventions for personality ailments. For stress management treatment cognitive therapy is more valid and useful than other interventions such as organization-based remedies.
Research evidence on the validity and effectiveness of the personal counseling approach, and psychotherapy is generally univocal. Individual counseling and psychotherapy are efficient both short-term and long-term for various psychological conditions as revealed by objective assessments and personal client feedback (Hofmann et al., 2012). However, no one therapeutic approach is more valid and useful than another. Empirical evidence indicates that some types of disorders are well solved by specific criteria for example clients with panic conditions produce better results under cognitive behavioral therapy.
Generally, all applicable empirical studies reveal that clients gain more when they are dedicated to making effort within the therapeutic approach availed in their specific counseling status. Other studies indicate that client variables such as commitment to working account for approximately 40% of therapeutic advancement (Butler et al., 2006). When a client suspects whether the cognitive model is directly related to their experience, they will find less gain from the cognitive therapy whereas a client who would want regular advice and instruction from the counselor may not benefit much from individual-centered counseling.
References
Beck, J. S., & Carlson, J. (2006). Cognitive therapy (p. 474). American Psychological
Association.
Butler, A. C., Chapman, J. E., Forman, E. M., & Beck, A. T. (2006). The empirical status of
cognitive-behavioral therapy: a review of meta-analyses. Clinical psychology review, 26(1), 17-31.
Hofmann, S. G., Asnaani, A., Vonk, I. J., Sawyer, A. T., & Fang, A. (2012). The efficacy of
cognitive behavioral therapy: A review of meta-analyses. Cognitive therapy and research, 36(5), 427-440.