Radical Behaviourist v Cognitive Psychology: a Pseudo-Quarrel?

Data on the results of cognitive therapies and theoretical models to explain them are proliferating. Yet from the current state of the evidence it is clear that we have as yet been furnished far more richly with questions than answers. Watts (1977) has indicated some of the issues remaining. What relationship has cognitive behaviour therapy to cognitive psychology as a whole? What kind of cognitive processes is it concerned with? How should these be formulated and investigated? Can covert stimuli and behaviours be equated with overt, both functionally and formally? How far must the individual be aware of (able explicitly to discriminate and describe) covert processes? What is the use of imaginal stimuli in cognitive behaviour therapy? What kind of changes take place during it? The achievement of answers to these and related questions is more than likely to have been hindered than helped by the vituperative nature of the arguments raging between the radical behaviourist and cognitive fields.

The Treatment of Agoraphobia in General Practice

The present paper aims to describe the work of a behaviourally oriented psychologist in the treatment of agoraphobia, the most common single problem referred in two years' work in primary care. Apart from its high frequency, agoraphobia has a particular relevance to the general practice settings as it is a problem which relates very specifically to the patient's home environment. A recent study by Mathews et al., (in press) found that a home-based treatment of agoraphobia produced at least as much improvement as clinic based treatments and required less therapist time. One might expect that a psychologist operating from the local health centre might achieve many of the advantages of such a program with a possible decrease in therapist time as travelling is reduced.

Ethical Issues For Human Services

In 1975, the Board of Directors of the AABT appointed a committee to conisder the development of a statement on ethical practice for the organization. The committee consisted of Nathan H. Azrin, (Anna Mental Health and Development Center, Anna, Illinois) and Richard B. Stuart (University of Utah), co-chairpersons; Todd R. Risley (University of Kansas, Lawrence); and Stephanie B. Stolz (National Institute of Mental Health, Rockville, Maryland).