Skip to main content

Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy: Assessment, Conceptualisation and Intervention

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Abstract

In this chapter, I will consider how REBT therapists assess the problems that people bring to therapy, how and when they carry out a case conceptualisation and how they intervene on these problems. Throughout, my main, but not exclusive focus will be on therapists helping clients address their problems by encouraging them to change their irrational beliefs to their rational alternatives using a range of different methods. In doing so, I will not take the usual tack of considering assessment and conceptualisation separately from intervention. Rather I will consider them as REBT therapists approach them in action, as interdependent clinical activities within a developing working alliance (see Chap. 7 this volume). This focus also reflects REBT’s view that cognition, emotion and behavior are interdependent processes and that these need to be considered as such throughout therapy. In this chapter, I will assume that the client and therapist have given their informed consent to proceed on the basis that REBT has the potential to be helpful to the client.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Also known as hypothesis-driven assessment (DiGiuseppe, 1991a)

  2. 2.

    For research on this point see Chaps. 4 & 5 in this volume.

  3. 3.

    A rigid beliefs is at the very core of psychological disturbance and is thus less accessible than the extreme beliefs that are derived from it.

  4. 4.

    Meaning ‘must’

References

  • Beal, D., Kopec, A. M., & DiGiuseppe, R. (1996). Disputing clients’ irrational beliefs. Journal of Rational-Emotive & Cognitive-Behavior Therapy, 14, 215–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beck, J. S. (2011). Cognitive therapy: Basics and beyond (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burns, D. D. (1980). Feeling good: The new mood therapy. New York, NY: Morrow.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiGiuseppe, R. (1991a). A rational–emotive model of assessment. In M. E. Bernard (Ed.), Using rational–emotive therapy effectively (pp. 151–172). New York, NY: Plenum.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • DiGiuseppe, R. (1991b). Comprehensive cognitive disputing in rational-emotive therapy. In M. E. Bernard (Ed.), Using rational-emotive therapy effectively (pp. 173–195). New York, NY: Plenum.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • DiGiuseppe, R., Leaf, R., Exner, T., & Robin, M.V. (1988). The development of a measure of rational/irrational thinking. Paper presented at the World Congress of Behavior Therapy, Edinburg, Scotland.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiGiuseppe, R. A., Doyle, K. A., Dryden, W., & Backx, W. (2014). A practitioner’s guide to rational emotive behavior therapy (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dryden, W. (1998). Understanding persons in the context of their problems: A rational emotive behavior therapy perspective. In M. Bruch & F. W. Bond (Eds.), Beyond diagnosis: Case formulation approaches in CBT (pp. 43–64). Chichester, UK: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dryden, W. (2001). Reason to change: A rational emotive behaviour therapy (REBT) workbook. Hove, UK: Brunner-Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dryden, W. (2009). Understanding emotional problems: The REBT perspective. Hove, UK: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dryden, W. (2015). Rational emotive behavior therapy: Distinctive features (2nd ed.). Hove, UK: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dryden, W. (2018a). Cognitive-emotive-behavioural coaching: A flexible and pluralistic approach. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dryden, W. (2018b). Very brief therapeutic conversations. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dryden, W., & Neenan, M. (2011). Working with resistance in rational emotive behaviour therapy. Hove, UK: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, A. (1963). Toward a more precise definition of “emotional” and “intellectual” insight. Psychological Reports, 13, 125–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, A. (1979). The issue of force and energy in behavioral change. Journal of Contemporary Psychotherapy, 10(2), 83–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, A. (1980a). The value of efficiency in psychotherapy. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice, 17, 414–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, A. (1980b). Rational-emotive therapy and cognitive behavior therapy: Similarities and differences. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 4, 325–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, A. (2000). Rational-emotive imagery. In M. E. Bernard & J. L. Wolfe (Eds.), The REBT resource book for practitioners (2nd ed., pp. II-8–II-10). New York, NY: Albert Ellis Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, A. (2002). Overcoming resistance: A rational emotive behavior therapy integrated approach. New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, A., & Joffe, D. (2002). A study of volunteer clients who experienced live sessions of rational emotive behavior therapy in front of a public audience. Journal of Rational-Emotive & Cognitive-Behavior Therapy, 20, 151–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, A. (1962). Reason and emotion in psychotherapy. New York: Lyle Stuart.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hickey, M., & Doyle, K. A. (2018). Rational emotive behavior therapy. In A. Vernon & K. A. Doyle (Eds.), Cognitive behavior therapies: A guidebook for practitioners (pp. 109–141). Alexandria, VA: American Counseling Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maultsby, M. C., Jr. (1975). Help yourself to happiness: Through rational self-counseling. New York, NY: Institute for Rational Living.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neenan, M., & Dryden, W. (1996). The intricacies of inference chaining. Journal of Rational-Emotive and Cognitive-Behavior Therapy, 14, 231–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walen, S. R., DiGiuseppe, R., & Wessler, R. L. (1980). A practitioner’s guide to rational emotive therapy. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Appendix

Appendix

Appendix: A Guide to the Eight Emotional Problems and their Healthy Alternatives with Adversities, Beliefs and Associated Behaviour and Thinking

Anxiety Versus Concern

A = Adversity

You are facing a threat to your personal domain

B = Belief

Irrational (rigid and extreme)

Rational (flexible and non-extreme)

C = Emotion

Anxiety

Concern

C = Behaviour

You avoid the threat

You face up to the threat without using any safety-seeking measures

You withdraw physically from the threat

You ward off the threat (e.g. by rituals or superstitious behaviour)

You take constructive action to deal with the threat

You try to neutralise the threat (e.g. by being nice to people of whom you are afraid)

You seek support from others to help you face up to the threat and then take constructive action by yourself rather than rely on them to handle it for you or to be there to rescue you

You distract yourself from the threat by engaging in other activity

You keep checking on the current status of the threat hoping to find that it has disappeared or become benign

You prepare to meet the threat but do not over-prepare

You seek reassurance from others that the threat is benign

You seek support from others so that if the threat happens they will handle it or be there to rescue you

You over-prepare in order to minimise the threat happening or so that you are prepared to meet it

(NB it is the over-preparation that is the problem here)

You tranquillise your feelings so that you don’t think about the threat

You overcompensate for feeling vulnerable by seeking out an even greater threat to prove to yourself that you can cope

C = Subsequent thinking

Threat-exaggerated thinking

 

You overestimate the probability of the threat occurring

You are realistic about the probability of the threat occurring

You underestimate your ability to cope with the threat

You view the threat realistically

You ruminate about the threat

You realistically appraise your ability to cope with the threat

You create an even more negative threat in your mind

You think about what to do concerning dealing with threat constructively rather than ruminate about the threat

You magnify the negative consequences of the threat and minimise its positive consequences

You have more task-irrelevant thoughts than in concern

You have more task-relevant thoughts than in anxiety

You picture yourself dealing with the threat in a realistic way

Safety-seeking thinking

 

You withdraw mentally from the threat

You try to persuade yourself that the threat is not imminent and that you are ‘imagining’ it

You think in ways designed to reassure yourself that the threat is benign or if not, that its consequences will be insignificant

You distract yourself from the threat e.g. by focusing on mental scenes of safety and well-being

You over-prepare mentally in order to minimise the threat happening or so that you are prepared to meet it (NB once again it is the over-preparation that is the problem here)

You picture yourself dealing with the threat in a masterful way

You overcompensate for your feeling of vulnerability by picturing yourself dealing effectively with an even bigger threat.

Depression Versus Sadness

A = Adversity

You have experienced a loss from the sociotropic and/or autonomous realms of your personal domain

You have experienced failure within the sociotropic and/or autonomous realms of your personal domain

You or others have experienced an undeserved plight

B = Belief

Irrational (rigid and extreme)

Rational (flexible and non-extreme)

C = Emotion

Depression

Sadness

C = Behaviour

You become overly dependent on and seek to cling to others (particularly in sociotropic depression)

You seek out reinforcements after a period of mourning (particularly when your inferential theme is loss)

You bemoan your fate or that of others to anyone who will listen (particularly in pity-based depression)

You create an environment inconsistent with depressed feelings

You create an environment consistent with your depressed feelings

You attempt to terminate feelings of depression in self-destructive ways

You either push away attempts to comfort you (in autonomous depression) or use such comfort to reinforce your dependency (in sociotropic depression) or your self- or other-pity (in pity-based depression)

You express your feelings about the loss, failure or undeserved plight and talk in a non-complaining way about these feelings to significant others

You allow yourself to be comforted in a way that helps you to express your feelings of sadness and mourn your loss

C = Subsequent thinking

You see only negative aspects of the loss, failure or undeserved plight

You are able to recognise both negative and positive aspects of the loss or failure

You think of other losses, failures and undeserved plights that you (and in the case of the latter, others) have experienced

You think you are able to help yourself

You think you are unable to help yourself (helplessness)

You look to the future with hope

You only see pain and blackness in the future (hopelessness)

 

You see yourself being totally dependent on others (in autonomous depression)

 

You see yourself as being disconnected from others (in sociotropic depression)

 

You see the world as full of undeservedness and unfairness (in plight-based depression)

 

You tend to ruminate concerning the source of your depression and its consequences

 

Guilt Versus Remorse

A = Adversity

You have broken your moral code

You have failed to live up to your moral code

You have hurt someone’s feelings

B = Belief

Irrational (rigid and extreme)

Rational (flexible and non-extreme)

C = Emotion

Guilt

Remorse

C = Behaviour

You escape from the unhealthy pain of guilt in self-defeating ways

You face up to the healthy pain that accompanies the realisation that you have sinned

You beg forgiveness from the person you have wronged

You ask, but do not beg, for forgiveness

You promise unrealistically that you will not ‘sin’ again

You understand the reasons for your wrongdoing and act on your understanding

You punish yourself physically or by deprivation

You atone for the sin by taking a penalty

You defensively disclaim responsibility for wrongdoing

You make excuses for your behaviour

You reject offers of forgiveness

You make appropriate amends

You do not make excuses for your behaviour or enact other defensive behaviour

You accept offers for forgiveness

C = Subsequent thinking

You conclude that you have definitely committed the sin

You take into account all relevant data when judging whether or not you have ‘sinned’

You assume more personal responsibility than the situation warrants

You assume an appropriate level of personal responsibility

You assign far less responsibility to others than is warranted

You assign an appropriate level of responsibility to others

You dismiss possible mitigating factors for your behaviour

You take into account mitigating factors

You only see your behaviour in a guilt-related context and fail to put it into an overall context

You put your behaviour into overall context

You think that you will receive retribution

You think you may be penalised rather than receive retribution

Shame Versus Disappointment

A = Adversity

Something highly negative has been revealed about you (or about a group with whom you identify) by yourself or by others

You have acted in a way that falls very short of your ideal

Others look down on or shun you (or a group with whom you identify) or think that they do

B = Belief

Irrational (rigid and extreme)

Rational (flexible and non-extreme)

C = Emotion

Shame

Disappointment

C = Behaviour

You remove yourself from the ‘gaze’ of others

You continue to participate actively in social interaction

You isolate yourself from others

You respond positively to attempts of others to restore social equilibrium

You save face by attacking other(s) who have ‘shamed’ you

 

You defend your threatened self-esteem in self-defeating ways

 

You ignore attempts by others to restore social equilibrium

 

C = Subsequent thinking

You overestimate the negativity of the information revealed

You see the information revealed in a compassionate self-accepting context

You overestimate the likelihood that the judging group will notice or be interested in the information

You are realistic about the likelihood that the judging group will notice or be interested in the information revealed

You overestimate the degree of disapproval you (or your reference group) will receive

You are realistic about the degree of disapproval self (or reference group) will receive

You overestimate how long any disapproval will last

You are realistic about how long any disapproval will last

Hurt Versus Sorrow

A = Adversity

Others treat you badly (and you think you do not deserve such treatment)

You think that the other person has devalued your relationship (i.e. someone indicates that their relationship with you is less important to them than the relationship is to you)

B = Belief

Irrational (rigid and extreme)

Rational (flexible and non-extreme)

C = Emotion

Hurt

Sorrow

C = Behaviour

You stop communicating with the other person

You communicate your feelings to the other directly

You sulk and make obvious you feel hurt without disclosing details of the matter

You indirectly criticise or punish the other person for their offence

You tell others how badly you have been treated, but don’t take any responsibility for any contribution you may have made to this

You request that the other person acts in a fairer manner towards you

You discuss the situation with others in a balanced way, focusing on the way you have been treated and taking responsibility for any contribution you may have made to this

C = Subsequent thinking

You overestimate the unfairness of the other person’s behaviour

You are realistic about the degree of unfairness in the other person’s behaviour

You think that the other person does not care for you or is indifferent to you

You think that the other person has acted badly rather than as demonstrating lack of caring or indifference

You see yourself as alone, uncared for or misunderstood

You see yourself as being in a poor situation, but still connected to, cared for by and understood by others not directly involved in the situation

You tend to think of past ‘hurts’

You think that the other person has to make the first move to you and you dismiss the possibility of making the first move towards that person

If you think of past hurts you do so with less frequency and less intensity than when you feel hurt

 

You are open to the idea of making the first move towards the other person

Unhealthy Anger Versus Healthy Anger

A = Adversity

You think that you have been frustrated in some way or your movement towards an important goal has been obstructed in some way

Someone has treated you badly

Someone has transgressed one of your personal rules

You have transgressed one of your own personal rules

Someone or something has threatened your self-esteem or disrespected you

B = Belief

Irrational (rigid and extreme)

Rational (flexible and non-extreme)

C = Emotion

Unhealthy anger

Healthy anger

C = Behaviour

You attack the other(s) physically

You attack the other(s) verbally

You assert yourself with the other(s)

You request, but do not demand, behavioural change from the other(s)

You attack the other(s) passive-aggressively

You leave an unsatisfactory situation non-aggressively after taking steps to deal with it

You displace the attack on to another person, animal or object

 

You withdraw aggressively

 

You recruit allies against the other(s)

 

C = Subsequent thinking

You overestimate the extent to which the other(s) acted deliberately

You think that the other(s) may have acted deliberately, but you also recognise that this may not have been the case

You see malicious intent in the motives of the other(s)

You are able to see the point of view of the other(s)

You see yourself as definitely right and the other(s) as definitely wrong

You have fleeting, rather than sustained thoughts to exact revenge

You are unable to see the point of view of the other(s)

You think that other(s) may have had malicious intent in their motives, but you also recognise that this may not have been the case

You plot to exact revenge

You think that you are probably rather than definitely right and the other(s) as probably rather than definitely wrong

You ruminate about the other’s behaviour and imagine coming out on top

 

Jealousy Versus Concern for Your Relationship

A = Adversity

A threat is posed to your relationship with your partner from a third person.

A threat is posed by uncertainty you face concerning your partner’s whereabouts, behaviour or thinking in the context of the first threat

B = Belief

Irrational (rigid and extreme)

Rational (flexible and non-extreme)

C = Emotion

Jealousy

Concern for your relationship

C = Behaviour

You seek constant reassurance that you are loved

You allow your partner to initiate expressing love for you without prompting her or seeking reassurance once she has done so

You monitor the actions and feelings of your partner

You allow your partner freedom without monitoring his/her feelings, actions and whereabouts

You search for evidence that your partner is involved with someone else

You attempt to restrict the movements or activities of your partner

You set tests which your partner has to pass

You retaliate for your partner’s presumed infidelity

You sulk

You allow your partner to show natural interest in members of the opposite sex without setting tests

You communicate your concern for your relationship in an open and non-blaming manner

C = Subsequent thinking

You exaggerate any threat to your relationship that does exist

You tend not to exaggerate any threat to your relationship that does exist

You think the loss of your relationship is imminent

You do not misconstrue ordinary conversations between your partner and another men/women

You misconstrue your partner’s ordinary conversations with relevant others as having romantic or sexual connotations

You do not construct visual images of your partner’s infidelity

You construct visual images of your partner’s infidelity

You accept that your partner will find others attractive but you do not see this as a threat

If your partner admits to finding another person attractive, you think that s/he finds that person more attractive than you and that s/he will leave you for this other person

 

Malicious Envy Versus Non-malicious Envy

A = Adversity

Another person possesses and enjoys something desirable that you do not have

B = Belief

Irrational (rigid and extreme)

Rational (flexible and non-extreme)

C = Emotion

Malicious envy

Non-malicious envy

C = Behaviour

You disparage verbally the person who has the desired possession to others

You strive to obtain the desired possession if it is truly what you want

You disparage verbally the desired possession to others

 

If you had the chance you would take away the desired possession from the other (either so that you will have it or that the other is deprived of it)

 

If you had the chance you would spoil or destroy the desired possession so that the other person does not have it

 

C = Subsequent thinking

You tend to denigrate in your mind the value of the desired possession and/or the person who possesses it

You honestly admit to yourself that you desire the desired possession

You try to convince yourself that you are happy with your possessions (although you are not)

You are honest with yourself if you are not happy with your possessions, rather than defensively trying to convince yourself that you are happy with them when you are not

You think about how to acquire the desired possession regardless of its usefulness

You think about how to obtain the desired possession because you desire it for healthy reasons

You think about how to deprive the other person of the desired possession

You can allow the other person to have and enjoy the desired possession without denigrating that person or the possession

You think about what the other has and lacks and what you have and lack

You think about how to spoil or destroy the other’s desired possession

You think about all the other things the other has that you don’t have

 

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Dryden, W. (2019). Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy: Assessment, Conceptualisation and Intervention. In: Bernard, M.E., Dryden, W. (eds) Advances in REBT. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93118-0_8

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics