Change mechanisms in cognitive therapy of a simple phobia: Logical analysis and empirical hypothesis testing

The effectiveness of two hypothesized change mechanisms in cognitive therapy was investigated: logical analysis and empirical hypothesis testing. Thirty-eight spider phobics, as determined by performance on a behavioral avoidance test, were randomly assigned to either one of these two conditions or to a no-treatment control condition. Subjects participated in three group sessions. Outcome phobia questionnaire data suggested that both mechanisms produced desirable changes in a short period of time, with stronger evidence that logical analysis was superior to the control. Outcome from the behavior avoidance test and self-efficacy ratings failed to reach statistical significance but the trends were in the direction of positive change. Results are discussed in terms of the tripartite response dessynchrony hypothesis. Suggestions for future process research in cognitive therapy are provided.William O'Donohue, Ph.D., is an assistant professor of psychology at Northern Illinois University.Jeff Szymanski is a graduate student in clinical psychology at Northern Illinois University.The authors would like to thank Christine Casselles, Melissa McKelvie, Thomas M. Brown, Jill C. Rudman, Bonnie Schrieber, Amy Ray, Anne Valle, Lisa Herold, Jacqueline Ryan, Heather Barta, and Angela Leek for their assistance in this project. Moreover, the authors are grateful to Sol Feldman and Jane Fisher for their comments on an earlier version of this paper.