帮助 关于我们

返回检索结果

接纳承诺疗法的作用机制--基于元分析结构方程模型
Mechanisms of the Acceptance and Commitment Therapy: A meta-analytic structural equation model

查看参考文献87篇

任志洪 1   赵春晓 1   卞诚 2   朱文臻 3   江光荣 1   祝卓宏 4 *  
文摘 接纳承诺疗法(Acceptance and Commitment Therapy, ACT)被认为是行为治疗"第三浪潮"的重要代表。本研究使用元分析结构方程模型,考察ACT的作用机制。通过数据库检索与筛选,最终纳入文献50篇。结果发现: ACT所假设的心理灵活性、接纳、此时此刻、价值的中介作用都达到统计显著,认知解离这一中介变量并不显著;中介机制在网络化干预中仍然得到检验;相较之传统CBT, ACT在所假设的机制上有其区别于CBT的优势。后续临床研究应更全面地测量6大核心机制,关注对美好生活提升的影响,采用多点瞬时评价法,并尽可能使用更高级、更先进的统计方法检验其作用机制。
其他语种文摘 Following the Behavioral Therapy and the Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy (CBT), Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) is considered as one of the third wave of behavioral therapies. ACT is based on the relational frame theory, and its therapeutic model includes 6 components (i.e., acceptance, cognitive defusion, self-as-context, committed action, contact with the present moment, values) and psychological flexibility. What is the empirical evidence for these hypothesized components or mechanisms? In recent years, integrating meta-analysis and structural equation modeling, the meta-analytic structural equation model (MASEM) has made it possible to systematically examine the mechanisms of psychotherapy. Compared to the traditional single randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies, the MASEM combines multiple samples to increase statistical power and obtain more robust model estimates. The current study utilized two-stage structural equation modeling (TSSEM) to examine three aspects of the mechanisms of ACT, including: (1) the mediational effects of psychological flexibility and the 6 components, (2) the unique mechanisms of ACT compared to CBT, and (3) the generalizability of these mechanisms to internet-based ACT interventions. Studies were identified by searching Web of science, PsycARTICLES, PsycINFO, Pubmed, Elsevier, EBSCO, Wiley Online Library from the first available date until November, 2017. We used the search term Acceptance and Commitment Therapy combined with acceptance, cognitive defusion, self-as-context, committed action, contact with the present moment, values, or psychological flexibility. Selection criteria included: (1) adult sample (age > 18), (2) RCT or quasi-experimental design, which measured pre-post change with ACT interventions, (3) quantitative measures of psychological outcomes (clinical or non-clinical) before and after treatment, and (4) quantitative measures of mediational variables at pre and post treatment. Excluding criteria were (1) not having a control group, (2) mixed intervention studies, which integrated ACT with other interventions, or included the Acceptance component but not the complete ACT model, or used CBT with the Acceptance component, and (3) medication treatment as the control group. The metaSEM package in R was used for the TSSEM analysis to examine the mechanisms of ACT. The literature search resulted in 50 studies, involving issues such as pain disorder, personality disorder, depression, anxiety, substance abuse, and work-related burnout among healthy populations. Most studies examined psychological flexibility (k=39), followed by contact with the present moment (k=14), acceptance (k=6), cognitive defusion (k=9), and values (k=5), whereas the studies of self-as-context (k=1) and committed action (k=1) were excluded from further MASEM analysis due to a low number of publications. Results indicated that (1) the mediational effects of psychological flexibility, acceptance, contact with the present moment, and values were significant, while the effects of cognitive defusion were not significant, (2) the mechanisms of ACT are evident in internet-based interventions, suggesting the generalizability of these mechanisms, and (3) compared to the traditional CBT, the hypothesized mechanisms of ACT have their unique advantages. Implications for future studies: (1) measure all 6 core mechanisms as comprehensively as possible; (2) focus more on the increase of wellbeing as opposed to improvement of symptoms; (3) use RCT based multiple measurements combined with the experience sampling method; and (4) apply more advanced statistical methods in addition to the traditional mediation statistics.
来源 心理学报 ,2019,51(6):662-676 【核心库】
DOI 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2019.00662
关键词 接纳承诺疗法 ; 元分析结构方程模型 ; 作用机制 ; 中介检验 ; 认知行为疗法
地址

1. 华中师范大学心理学院, 青少年网络心理与行为教育部重点实验室;;湖北省人的发展与心理健康重点实验室, 武汉, 430079  

2. 北京师范大学, IDG/麦戈文脑科学研究院, 认知神经科学与学习国家重点实验室, 北京, 100875  

3. 北德克萨斯大学, 美国, 德克萨斯, 76203  

4. 中国科学院心理研究所, 中国科学院心理研究所, 中国科学院心理健康重点实验室, 北京, 100101

语种 中文
文献类型 研究性论文
ISSN 0439-755X
学科 基础医学
基金 国家社会科学基金
文献收藏号 CSCD:6502617

参考文献 共 87 共5页

1.  Aderka I M. Sudden gains during psychological treatments of anxiety and depression: A meta-analysis. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,2012,80(1):93-101 CSCD被引 3 次    
2.  Alonso-Fernandez M. Acceptance and commitment therapy and selective optimization with compensation for institutionalized older people with chronic pain: A pilot study. Pain Medicine,2013,17(2):264-277 CSCD被引 1 次    
3.  Alsubaie M. Mechanisms of action in mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) and mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) in people with physical and/or psychological conditions: A systematic review. Clinical Psychology Review,2017,55:74-91 CSCD被引 5 次    
4.  Arch J J. Randomized clinical trial of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) versus acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) for mixed anxiety disorders. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,2012,80(5):750-765 CSCD被引 2 次    
5.  Assaz D A. Cognitive defusion in acceptance and commitment therapy: What are the basic processes of change. The Psychological Record,2018,68(4):405-418 CSCD被引 1 次    
6.  A-Tjak J G L. A meta-analysis of the efficacy of acceptance and commitment therapy for clinically relevant mental and physical health problems. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics,2015,84(1):30-36 CSCD被引 10 次    
7.  Avdagic E. A randomised controlled trial of acceptance and commitment therapy and cognitive-behaviour therapy for generalised anxiety disorder. Behaviour Change,2014,31(2):110-130 CSCD被引 2 次    
8.  Baron R M. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,1986,51(6):1173-1182 CSCD被引 936 次    
9.  Beck A T. Cognitive therapy: Past, present, and future. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,1993,61(2):194-198 CSCD被引 4 次    
10.  Black J J. Mechanisms of change in adolescent substance use treatment: How does treatment work?. Substance Abuse,2014,35(4):344-351 CSCD被引 1 次    
11.  Bluett E J. Acceptance and commitment therapy for anxiety and OCD spectrum disorders: An empirical review. Journal of Anxiety Disorders,2014,28(6):612-624 CSCD被引 1 次    
12.  Bond F W. Preliminary psychometric properties of the Acceptance and Action Questionnaire-II: A revised measure of psychological inflexibility and experiential avoidance. Behavior Therapy,2011,42(4):676-688 CSCD被引 42 次    
13.  Cheung M L. Meta-analytic structural equation modeling: A two stage approach. Psychological Methods,2005,10(1):40-64 CSCD被引 4 次    
14.  Cheung M W L. Fixed-and random-effects meta-analytic structural equation modeling: Examples and analyses in R. Behavior Research Methods,2014,46(1):29-40 CSCD被引 2 次    
15.  Cheung M W L. Meta-Analysis: A structural equation modeling approach,2015 CSCD被引 5 次    
16.  Clarke S. Acceptance and commitment therapy group for treatment-resistant participants: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science,2014,3(3):179-188 CSCD被引 1 次    
17.  Clarke S. Acceptance and commitment therapy-based self-management versus psychoeducation training for staff caring for clients with a personality disorder: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Personality Disorders,2015,29(2):163-176 CSCD被引 1 次    
18.  Cohen J Jr. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. (2nd Edition.),1988 CSCD被引 1 次    
19.  Dimidjian S. Considering meta-analysis, meaning, and metaphor: A systematic review and critical examination of "Third Wave" cognitive and behavioral therapies. Behavior Therapy,2016,47(6):886-905 CSCD被引 3 次    
20.  Eilenberg T. Intervening variables in group-based acceptance & commitment therapy for severe health anxiety. Behaviour Research and Therapy,2017,92:24-31 CSCD被引 2 次    
引证文献 9 篇

1 邱丽芳 强迫症患者强迫症状与认知融合、经验性回避的关系 中华行为医学与脑科学杂志,2019,28(11):999-1004
CSCD被引 5 次

2 汤俊 接纳承诺疗法在进食障碍中的应用 中华行为医学与脑科学杂志,2019,28(12):1145-1148
CSCD被引 2 次

显示所有9篇文献

论文科学数据集
PlumX Metrics
相关文献

 作者相关
 关键词相关
 参考文献相关

版权所有 ©2008 中国科学院文献情报中心 制作维护：中国科学院文献情报中心
地址：北京中关村北四环西路33号 邮政编码：100190 联系电话：(010)82627496 E-mail:cscd@mail.las.ac.cn 京ICP备05002861号-4 | 京公网安备11010802043238号