Evidence-based Essay
Practice-based evidence (PBE) is non-scientific, although evidence can be collected scientifically. For example, one has a ‘good idea’ which should logically fix the situation, implement the idea through a series of strategies. Survey the situation before and after the intervention, demonstrate possibilities to change, possibly ignore outliers for whom the intervention does not work (Simons, Kushner, Jones, & James, 2003). This practice-based evidence lacks a scientific grounding.
Science is evidence-based and has two focuses: one that is causal/problem orientated and the other outcome focused. The former investigates the problem, examines probable causes, hypothesise’s on the causes and possible treatments (what …show more content…
Hofmann, Asmundson, and Beck (2013) echo views that techniques applied in CBT are consistent with the medical model of psychiatry, where the focus is on improving brain functioning, symptom reduction and disorder remission. This view is maintained in BA whereby developing new skills to identify avoidance-patterns are first tackled, then, short-term and long-term goals can be addressed by interventions that are focused toward assisting clients to change other components of their lives (Jacobson et al., 2001).
To compartmentalise and isolate the ‘active’ ingredient in CBT, Jacobson et al. (1996) compared outcomes of three versions of CBT. One treatment was CBT; this was compared to two ‘stripped down’ versions: one used the behavioural components of CBT (BA) and one used both the behavioural and cognitive components but only at the level of targeting automatic thoughts (CT). Jacobson and colleagues found all three produced non-significant results. However, they did find that BA outperformed both versions of CBT and …show more content…
The APS define evidence-based practice as being one with the highest efficacy (i.e. PBE). In this report, they cite many studies on the efficacy of CBT. However, many of the papers of the report found CBT ineffective in producing lasting outcomes and they did not compare CBT to BA.
In summary, this paper describes aspects of BA, illustrating its philosophical and conceptual roots. It is a therapy firmly rooted in psychological principles (e.g., operant conditioning). It is considered to being a frontline treatment for depression that is evidence-based. Its distinction from other related therapies (i.e., CBT) has highlighted clear similarities and marked differences.
To conclude similar outcomes were achieved through evidence-based and non-evidence based therapies. CBT does not have the grounds of coherent scientific rationale; there is no doubting BA has a scientific basis. Does science matter in psychotherapy? If not for science and scientific EBP we risk repeating the inevitable mistakes of the past (e.g.,
Practice-based evidence (PBE) is non-scientific, although evidence can be collected scientifically. For example, one has a ‘good idea’ which should logically fix the situation, implement the idea through a series of strategies. Survey the situation before and after the intervention, demonstrate possibilities to change, possibly ignore outliers for whom the intervention does not work (Simons, Kushner, Jones, & James, 2003). This practice-based evidence lacks a scientific grounding.
Science is evidence-based and has two focuses: one that is causal/problem orientated and the other outcome focused. The former investigates the problem, examines probable causes, hypothesise’s on the causes and possible treatments (what …show more content…
Hofmann, Asmundson, and Beck (2013) echo views that techniques applied in CBT are consistent with the medical model of psychiatry, where the focus is on improving brain functioning, symptom reduction and disorder remission. This view is maintained in BA whereby developing new skills to identify avoidance-patterns are first tackled, then, short-term and long-term goals can be addressed by interventions that are focused toward assisting clients to change other components of their lives (Jacobson et al., 2001).
To compartmentalise and isolate the ‘active’ ingredient in CBT, Jacobson et al. (1996) compared outcomes of three versions of CBT. One treatment was CBT; this was compared to two ‘stripped down’ versions: one used the behavioural components of CBT (BA) and one used both the behavioural and cognitive components but only at the level of targeting automatic thoughts (CT). Jacobson and colleagues found all three produced non-significant results. However, they did find that BA outperformed both versions of CBT and …show more content…
The APS define evidence-based practice as being one with the highest efficacy (i.e. PBE). In this report, they cite many studies on the efficacy of CBT. However, many of the papers of the report found CBT ineffective in producing lasting outcomes and they did not compare CBT to BA.
In summary, this paper describes aspects of BA, illustrating its philosophical and conceptual roots. It is a therapy firmly rooted in psychological principles (e.g., operant conditioning). It is considered to being a frontline treatment for depression that is evidence-based. Its distinction from other related therapies (i.e., CBT) has highlighted clear similarities and marked differences.
To conclude similar outcomes were achieved through evidence-based and non-evidence based therapies. CBT does not have the grounds of coherent scientific rationale; there is no doubting BA has a scientific basis. Does science matter in psychotherapy? If not for science and scientific EBP we risk repeating the inevitable mistakes of the past (e.g.,