47. AVRUPA DAVRANIŞ VE KOGNİTİF TERAPİLERİ BİRLİĞİ KONGRESİ
13 - 16 EYLÜL 2017 / LJUBLJANA - SLOVENYA

Jonathan Huppert

SPEECHES

  • IN CONGRESS WORKSHOP
  • PLENARY

 

 

IN CONGRESS WORKSHOP

GOOD PRACTICE OF IN VIVO AND IMAGINAL EXPOSURE THERAPY

Good practice of exposure therapy requires a clear understanding of the core fear, a good case conceptualization, and knowledge of the current state of the field, both in terms of theory and research. Many challenges exist in both teaching and in doing good exposure therapy. The current workshop will be divided into four parts: first, theories and principles of good exposure therapy (in vivo, interoceptive, and imaginal exposures) will be reviewed, including integrating both cognitive and acceptance techniques into standard exposure therapy. Next, evidence for specificity of particular strategies for specific anxiety disorders will be reviewed (e.g., interoceptive exposure for panic, video feedback for social anxiety), as well as general principles for in vivo and imaginal exposures. Third, tips for difficult to treat patients will be discussed. Finally, experiences in disseminating these practices to both novice students as well as to experienced non-CBT clinicians will be described, with lessons learned, and pitfalls to avoid.

 

PLENARY

Common and specific factors in CBT: Theory and research from studies in the treatment of anxiety

The common vs. specific factors debate has been around for almost 90 years. Most advocates of CBT have suggested that common factors are necessary, but not sufficient. Others have argued that the Dodo Bird is alive and well, and that all treatments that are credible or bona fide yield similar results. In the current talk, I will review data from clinical trials of CBT for panic disorder, social anxiety disorder, and OCD in which common factors such as the therapist effects, working alliance, expectancy, and motivation have been examined along with specific factors such as changes in negative cognitions, attentional bias, interpretation bias, or emotion regulation (reappraisal, suppression). Overall, results suggest a more nuanced picture than either school typically advocates, such that the role of the common factors has an impact as do specific techniques and mechanisms, partially depending on the disorder in question and potentially the difficulty of the case at hand. Advances in the field will come from careful, honest, and critical examination of the data, openness to data from other perspectives (for potential for integration), and with continued attempts to improve interventions as well as scaling them up via internet based and other low-intensity interventions.