Letting a little nonverbal air into the room: Insights from acceptance and commitment therapy Part 1: Philosophical and theoretical underpinnings

In recent years, a new “wave” of mindfulness based Cognitive Behavior Therapies (CBT) has become popular. Such approaches include Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT; Acceptance and commitment therapy: An experiential approach to behaviour change. New York: Guilford Press, 1999), Mindfulness-based Cognitive Therapy for Depression (Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for depression: A new approach to preventing relapse. New York: Guilford Press, 2002), and Mindfulness-based Stress Management (Full catastrophe living: using the wisdom of your body and mind to face stress, pain, and illness. New York: Dell Publishing, 1990). In contrast to traditional CBT, these approaches often minimize attempts to change the form and frequency of dysfunctional thoughts. Is there any way to integrate traditional CBT with mindfulness based CBT? To answer this question, we discuss the philosophical and theoretical underpinnings of one form of traditional CBT (Rational-Emotive and Cognitive Behavioral Therapy) and one form of mindfulness based CBT (ACT). We argue that some aspects of each therapy can be integrated. However, in order to prevent techniques from being used haphazardly or inconsistently, we suggest that the different forms of CBT need to be driven by a common philosophical orientation (e.g., functional contextualism) and theoretical orientation (e.g., Relational Frame Theory).     

不同框架下的视觉定位

本实验探讨了对置于正方形、等边三角形和圆中的刺激点所进行的１点定位、２点定位、３点定位,并比较了在定位有框架和定位无框架时的情况。结果发现：（１）在刺激呈现时间为１００ｍｓ和３００ｍｓ时．在３种定位任务中,当定位有框架时被试定位的绝对误差均小于定位无框架的。（２）在两种呈现时间下被试在３种定位任务中的绝对误差均处于同一水平,表现出现了视觉定位中的结构效应,并且几个不同的框架没有不同的作用。     

Necessity and Relative Contingency

The paper introduces a contingential language extended with a propositional constant τ axiomatized in a system named KΔτ , which receives a semantical analysis via relational models. A definition of the necessity operator in terms of Δ and τ allows proving (i) that KΔτ is equivalent to a modal system named K□τ (ii) that both KΔτ and K□τ are tableau-decidable and complete with respect to the defined relational semantics (iii) that the modal τ -free fragment of KΔτ is exactly the deontic system KD. In §4 it is proved that the modal τ -free fragment of a system KΔτw weaker than KΔτ is exactly the minimal normal system K. Presented by Daniele Mundici