It sure was an amazing conference! From talking to a number of people it seemed
that whether it was your first or fifth conference there was plenty of inspiring
and interesting material. Bring on Adelaide 2010!!

It has been suggested that some of you may be interested to see some photos from
our conference:

http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=161274&id=658445718&l=e115b7dfcb

Most of these were taken at the follies and many are not the best quality but i
think they help to capture the sense of fun and community that was developed.
Going to an ACT conference is truly one of the highlights of my year :-)

Thanks to all involved for a truly wonderful 5 days!

Warmest regards from Sydney

Louise

> joseph_ciarrochi <joseph_ciarrochi@...> wrote:
>
> Steve thought some of you might want to know what has been happening
> down under.
>
>
> We just completed our largest conference ever, over 300 people. this is
> already as large as the conferences for much older organizations (e.g.,
> australian CBT).
>
> I was amazed to hear how much was being done all over australia. People
> are conducting top research in both ACT and RFT, people are creating new
> materials (e.g., ACT comic book for kids, new ACT songs, websites),
> people are stepping into some difficult populations with the attempt to
> reduce suffering and promote caring relationships. People are coming
> into ACBS from everywhere, psychology, counseling,eductation,
> organizations.
>
> Really, I am in shock. I mean, I always give these idealistic talks at
> the ACT conferences, but (i am embarressed to admit) my mind is telling
> me that there is no way we can really improve the human condition.
> people have been spouting this crazy-arse utopian stuff for decades.Can
> something new really happen here?
>
> And I really want to single out one australian researcher/practitioner
> here, Darin Cairns in Perth, Australia. I know you folks have been
> hearing that RFT is practical, and maybe you have not quite believed it.
> You reasonabley expect to see some proof that RFT is useful.
>
>
> Well, Darin runs a large clinic for kids with Autism. He has been seeing
> amazing progress using RFT enhanced interventions. I mean, he sees kids
> going from not being able to relate at all, to being able to have
> empathy and connectedness with their parents. His clinic seems to be
> outperforming the other, more standard behavioral clinics. He has a huge
> waitlist.
>
> He is changing lives with RFT...and his workshop convinced me that we
> can absolutely not have ACT without RFT.  RFT is---gasp---practical.
>
> I have now made it my mission to prod darin into publishing his data
> asap. I think it will be this kind of data that helps return behaviorism
> to the main stream....
>
>
> perhaps many of you, like me, have minds that say "this whole ACBS thing
> is a bunch of idealistic poopie. We humans will always make war. When
> not making war, we will find ways to make psychological war and hurt our
> fellow humans."
>
> Here is a report, prepared by expert minds. It organized by King
> Ferdinand of Spain to study Columbus' plans to find a shorter route to
> India. This voyage is similar to the voyage we are trying to make with
> ACBS (risky, we can't be certain we are traveling in a good direction).
> The experts recommended that columbus not attempt so difficult a voyage
> because:
>
> I A Voyage to Asia would require three years.
>
> (it will take centuries to increase human empathy. We will be extinct
> before then).
>
> II. The western Ocean is infinite and perhaps unnavigable.
>
> (human nature is too dark and evil to be saved)
>
> III. If he reached the Antipodes he could not get back.
>
> (We need to act mean and selfish to survive. evolution requires it)
>
> IV There are no Antipodes because the greater part of the globe is
> covered with water, and because St. Augustine said so.
>
> (everybody is nasty everywhere. nietzchie said so.)
>
> V. Of the five zones, only three are habitable.
>
> (only australia is habitable )
>
> VI. So many centuries after the Creation, it is unlikely that anyone
> could find hitherto unknown lands of any value.
>
> (the world has never seen an "ideal" human state where people mostly
> care about each other, so therefore such a state can never be.)
>
> we don't have to believe the hype...
>
> best
> J
>
>
>
> Dr. Joseph Ciarrochi
> Department of Psychology
> University of Wollongong
> NSW, Australia, 2522
>
> My publications
> http://acceptandchange.com/publications.html
>
> Those friends thou hast, and their adoption tried,
> Grapple them to thy soul with hoops of steel;
>
> William Shakespeare

Louise Shepherd
Clinical Psychologist
Suite 8 / Level 3, 44 Bridge St
Sydney NSW 2000
Phone: 0417 130672
Fax: +61 2 92477955

IMPORTANT: Confidentiality cannot be
guaranteed, as email is not a secure medium.
To discuss any personal concerns, please call
during working hours. Please be aware that I do
not maintain 24-hour access to email accounts
and do not usually view emails over the
weekend.

This e-mail, including any attachments, may
contain private or confidential information. If
you think you may not be the intended
recipient, or if you have received this e-mail in
error, please contact the sender immediately
and delete all copies of this e-mail.   If you are
not the intended recipient, you must not
reproduce any part of this e-mail or disclose its
contents to any other party

I have been meaning to recommend this book for awhile to ACT folks.

Derived Relational Responding Applications for Learners with Autism and Other
Developmental Disabilities: A Progressive Guide to Change
~ Ruth Anne Rehfeldt (Editor), Yvonne Barnes-Holmes (Editor)
New Harbinger Pubns; 1 edition (February 2, 2009)

http://www.amazon.com/Relational-Responding-Applications-Developmental-Disabilit\
ies/dp/1572245360/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1258334167&sr=8-1


I know the title sounds incredibly boring if you are not working in Autism.
(Don't RFT folks have a way of making exciting things sound dull). I recommend
it because, to quote Darin Cairns, autism allows you to see language in slow
motion (and therefore see more clearly what is going on).  The book is intended
for a wide audience (e.g., parents of an autistic child), so it is remarkably
clear.

The book walks you through the development of language, from a largely RFT
perspective (about 90% of the chapters are RFT). It shows the specific
interventions you would use to train frames, ranging from the simple (e.g.,
naming) to the more complex (perspective taking frames). It does not focus so
much on clinical psych. implications, since it is about autism, but it does give
the clearest description of RFT I've found so far. You might want to read this
book and then read some of the articles and chapters that have been written
about the implications of RFT for clinical practice.


best
Joseph





Dr. Joseph Ciarrochi
Department of Psychology
University of Wollongong
NSW, Australia, 2522

My publications
http://acceptandchange.com/publications.html

Those friends thou hast, and their adoption tried,
Grapple them to thy soul with hoops of steel;

William Shakespeare

 

Steve thought some of you might want to know what has been happening down under.

We just completed our largest conference ever, over 300 people. this is already as large as the conferences for much older organizations (e.g., australian CBT).

I was amazed to hear how much was being done all over australia. People are conducting top research in both ACT and RFT, people are creating new materials (e.g., ACT comic book for kids, new ACT songs, websites), people are stepping into some difficult populations with the attempt to reduce suffering and promote caring relationships. People are coming into ACBS from everywhere, psychology, counseling,eductation, organizations.

Really, I am in shock. I mean, I always give these idealistic talks at the ACT conferences, but (i am embarressed to admit) my mind is telling me that there is no way we can really improve the human condition. people have been spouting this crazy-arse utopian stuff for decades.Can something new really happen here?

And I really want to single out one australian researcher/practitioner here, Darin Cairns in Perth, Australia. I know you folks have been hearing that RFT is practical, and maybe you have not quite believed it. You reasonabley expect to see some proof that RFT is useful.

Well, Darin runs a large clinic for kids with Autism. He has been seeing amazing progress using RFT enhanced interventions. I mean, he sees kids going from not being able to relate at all, to being able to have empathy and connectedness with their parents. His clinic seems to be outperforming the other, more standard behavioral clinics. He has a huge waitlist.

He is changing lives with RFT...and his workshop convinced me that we can absolutely not have ACT without RFT. RFT is---gasp---practical.

I have now made it my mission to prod darin into publishing his data asap. I think it will be this kind of data that helps return behaviorism to the main stream....

perhaps many of you, like me, have minds that say "this whole ACBS thing is a bunch of idealistic poopie. We humans will always make war. When not making war, we will find ways to make psychological war and hurt our fellow humans."

Here is a report, prepared by expert minds. It organized by King Ferdinand of Spain to study Columbus' plans to find a shorter route to India. This voyage is similar to the voyage we are trying to make with ACBS (risky, we can't be certain we are traveling in a good direction). The experts recommended that columbus not attempt so difficult a voyage because:

I A Voyage to Asia would require three years.

(it will take centuries to increase human empathy. We will be extinct before then).

II. The western Ocean is infinite and perhaps unnavigable.

(human nature is too dark and evil to be saved)

III. If he reached the Antipodes he could not get back.

(We need to act mean and selfish to survive. evolution requires it)

IV There are no Antipodes because the greater part of the globe is covered with water, and because St. Augustine said so.

(everybody is nasty everywhere. nietzchie said so.)

V. Of the five zones, only three are habitable.

(only australia is habitable )

VI. So many centuries after the Creation, it is unlikely that anyone could find hitherto unknown lands of any value.

(the world has never seen an "ideal" human state where people mostly care about each other, so therefore such a state can never be.)

we don't have to believe the hype...

best
J

Dr. Joseph Ciarrochi
Department of Psychology
University of Wollongong
NSW, Australia, 2522

My publications
http://acceptandchange.com/publications.html

Those friends thou hast, and their adoption tried,
Grapple them to thy soul with hoops of steel;

William Shakespeare

Steve thought some of you might want to know what has been happening down under.


We just completed our largest conference ever, over 300 people. this is already
as large as the conferences for much older organizations (e.g., australian CBT).

I was amazed to hear how much was being done all over australia. People are
conducting top research in both ACT and RFT, people are creating new materials
(e.g., ACT comic book for kids, new ACT songs, websites), people are stepping
into some difficult populations with the attempt to reduce suffering and promote
caring relationships. People are coming into ACBS from everywhere, psychology,
counseling,eductation, organizations.

Really, I am in shock. I mean, I always give these idealistic talks at the ACT
conferences, but (i am embarressed to admit) my mind is telling me that there is
no way we can really improve the human condition. people have been spouting this
crazy-arse utopian stuff for decades.Can something new really happen here?

And I really want to single out one australian researcher/practitioner here,
Darin Cairns in Perth, Australia. I know you folks have been hearing that RFT is
practical, and maybe you have not quite believed it. You reasonabley expect to
see some proof that RFT is useful.


Well, Darin runs a large clinic for kids with Autism. He has been seeing amazing
progress using RFT enhanced interventions. I mean, he sees kids going from not
being able to relate at all, to being able to have empathy and connectedness
with their parents. His clinic seems to be outperforming the other, more
standard behavioral clinics. He has a huge waitlist.

He is changing lives with RFT...and his workshop convinced me that we can
absolutely not have ACT without RFT.  RFT is---gasp---practical.

I have now made it my mission to prod darin into publishing his data asap. I
think it will be this kind of data that helps return behaviorism to the main
stream....


perhaps many of you, like me, have minds that say "this whole ACBS thing is a
bunch of idealistic poopie. We humans will always make war. When not making war,
we will find ways to make psychological war and hurt our fellow humans."

Here is a report, prepared by expert minds. It organized by King Ferdinand of
Spain to study Columbus' plans to find a shorter route to India. This voyage is
similar to the voyage we are trying to make with ACBS (risky, we can't be
certain we are traveling in a good direction). The experts recommended that
columbus not attempt so difficult a voyage because:

I A Voyage to Asia would require three years.

(it will take centuries to increase human empathy. We will be extinct before
then).

II. The western Ocean is infinite and perhaps unnavigable.

(human nature is too dark and evil to be saved)

III. If he reached the Antipodes he could not get back.

(We need to act mean and selfish to survive. evolution requires it)

IV There are no Antipodes because the greater part of the globe is covered with
water, and because St. Augustine said so.

(everybody is nasty everywhere. nietzchie said so.)

V. Of the five zones, only three are habitable.

(only australia is habitable )

VI. So many centuries after the Creation, it is unlikely that anyone could find
hitherto unknown lands of any value.

(the world has never seen an "ideal" human state where people mostly care about
each other, so therefore such a state can never be.)

we don't have to believe the hype...

best
J



Dr. Joseph Ciarrochi
Department of Psychology
University of Wollongong
NSW, Australia, 2522

My publications
http://acceptandchange.com/publications.html

Those friends thou hast, and their adoption tried,
Grapple them to thy soul with hoops of steel;

William Shakespeare

Francis: "But more important: the distinction intrinsic-extrinsic is a bit
arbitrary. Probably more to do with history and point in the history (newer
behaviour with newer experiences, reinforcements are experienced as being more
extrinsic motivated, I guess).
Intrinsic motivation is something that probably doesn't exist. Motivation is
largely contextually influenced. A RFT-analysis of this subject would be more
than welcome."

Maarten: To pick up this thread: from the 1999 ACT book  (p41): " ... one of the
major consequences for derived relational responding is "sense making". Even
without any external feedback, subjects will create orderly stimulus relations
between arbitrary stimulus events, and..."

Isn't this an example of "intrinsic motivation"?

Best to all,

Maarten

--- In acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy@yahoogroups.com, "De Groot, Francis"
<francis.de.groot@...> wrote:
>
> There has been some interesting behavioral research on intrinsic-extrinsic
motivation and the influence of rewards: eg see Cameron ea (2001) Pervasive
negative effects of rewards on intrinsic motivation: the myth continues. The
Behavior Analyst, 24, 1-44.
>
> But more important: the distinction intrinsic-extrinsic is a bit arbitrary.
Probably more to do with history and point in the history (newer behaviour with
newer experiences, reinforcements are experienced as being more extrinsic
motivated, I guess).
>
> Intrinsic motivation is something that probably doesn’t exist. Motivation is
largely contextually influenced. A RFT-analysis of this subject would be more
than welcome.
>
>
>
> The same goes for token economies: mostly a token economy is being seen as a
system of operant conditioning, leading to contingency shaped behavior.
>
> My idea is that mostly this isn’t the case: it’s an example of verbal
learning (in the RFT-sense of the word).
>
> Most often the reinforcement (vouchers, stamps, …) are given far too late to
be contingent on the behavior.
>
> Roughly speaking token economies do 2 things:
>
> 1. Pull the attention to a certain behavior (important function); people learn
to notice what others want and can decide what they do. The exact contingencies
don’t matter. That’s why some studies found that even noncontingent token
delivery works. This is a matter of verbally relating things.
> 2. Learn people how they can get rewards. This is the less important part of
it.
>
> My point: token economy isn’t operant conditioning, it’s relational
framing.
>
>
>
> I know: there are exceptions. You can use token economies with animals and
very small children. But if you read those articles you’ll notice they work in
a very different way (much more immediately reinforcing, much more frequent,
much more slower learning, …).
>
>
>
> Best,
>
>
>
> Francis
>
>
>
> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy@yahoogroups.com] Namens Marco
> Verzonden: woensdag 4 november 2009 14:44
> Aan: acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy@yahoogroups.com
> Onderwerp: Re: RE : [acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy] About motivation
>
>
>
>
>
> If it's correct what's said in the video this conversation started with,
couldn't it be the case that token economy would work better if the tasks asked
from the persons in question are simple, and would work worse if the tasks
increase in complexity?
>
> Best,
> Marco
>
> --- In acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy%40yahoogroups.com> , Benjamin Schoendorff
<benjamin.schoendorff@> wrote:
> >
> > Tango, that¹s a beautiful personal story, thanks for sharing.
> >
> > In case I was unclear I don¹t recommend token economies when communication
> > is good and natural reinforcers are in effect.
> >
> > I was referring to situations of counterpliance which is what walks through
> > my door. In those situations, I find token economies really help keeping
> > parents consistent and shifting communications from aversive to appetitive.
> >
> > Warm regards,
> >
> > benji
> >
> >
> > Le 04/11/09 13:36, « Tango » <tango@> a écrit :
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi all, just a few thoughts about how I¹ve seen it work at home.
> > >
> > > My children (10 and 13  year old) like reading and spend some time at it,
> > > almost daily. At first ( three or four years ago) we had to encourage them
in
> > > several ways to spend about one hour a day in their afternoon work
(dedicated
> > > to study, homework and all ³reading and writing stuff². If homework was
> > > finished, they still had to fill that time with reading of their choice).
> > >
> > > We tried to provide modelling reading visibly or commenting what, or how
much
> > > we have read, making ³informal comments² such as ³wow, that was heavy
to read,
> > > ³last night I read  �'til my head was drowsy², or ³I laughed my head
off when I
> > > was reading in the bus, and people stared at me puzzled².
> > > Probably there was a lot of pliance in the initial phases, but comments
about
> > > the ³reading world² probably have shifted the focus towards more natural
> > > intrinsic reinforcers.
> > >
> > > Natural reinforcing can occur due to content, but also to reading per se,
that
> > > is: reading so many pages (my son usually makes many comments on this
regard)
> > > or finishing so many books or getting to finish a really ³tough brick². 
I
> > > have found that it has also worked to have a good reinforcing environment
(in
> > > order to produce good memories related to reading (augmentals?) as well):
> > > ³reading a book while sipping a cup of tea on a cold winter¹s day, or
going to
> > > the library or bookshop eager to see if our book has arrived, making a big
> > > celebration about our amazon delivery, commenting things or stories we
have
> > > read during supper, etc.²
> > >
> > >  This has proved to be effective to my kid¹s who have developed an
³unusual²
> > > (for their peer¹s environment) positive attitude/motivation towards
reading.
> > >
> > >
> > > Token economy is far too artificial and IMO it should be used in a very
> > > careful way and dosing, and be retired as soon as possible J
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > > G. Tango
> > >
> > > PS. I recommend ³Diary of a Wimpy Kid² by Jeff Kinney. I had a lot of
fun
> > > reading it, and one can almost read it completely in one or two
³sittings².
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > De: acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy%40yahoogroups.com>
> > > [mailto:acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy%40yahoogroups.com> ] En nombre de Robb,
> > > Harold B.
> > > Enviado el: miércoles, 04 de noviembre de 2009 5:24
> > > CC: acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy%40yahoogroups.com>
> > > Asunto: RE: RE : [acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy] About motivation
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Actually, as I recall, there was some pretty good behavioral work on this
> > > regarding reading in the 1970's. It showed that if you provided a reward
> > > independent of what children got out of what they were reading, e.g. tokes
> > > that could be cashed in for "goodies", then reading behavior would drop
off
> > > after the reward was withdrawn. I think it was possible to use a fading
> > > proceedure but I am not sure about that. The point of the work was, "don't
use
> > > a token economy system to teach reading in the classroom. Use a system
that
> > > the reader finds what is read is, itself, reinforcing. Otherwise, reading
> > > behavior will not be maintained outside the classroom token economy. This
> > > problem shows up in a lot of token economy work because the behaviors that
are
> > > learned and not brought under control of the natural reinforcers that
ought to
> > > be intrisically related to them.
> > >
> > > The better educated among us can provide support or rebuttal for my
claims.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > >
> > > Hank
> > > ________________________________________
> > > From: acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy%40yahoogroups.com>
> > > <mailto:acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy%40yahoogroups.com>
> > > [acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy%40yahoogroups.com>
> > > <mailto:acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy%40yahoogroups.com> ] On Behalf Of
> > > Maarten Aalberse [maarten.aalberse@ <mailto:maarten.aalberse%40ime.fr> ]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2009 9:08 PM
> > > To: Thomas Gustavsson
> > > Cc: Kevin Polk; acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy%40yahoogroups.com>
> > > <mailto:acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy%40yahoogroups.com>
> > > Subject: RE : RE : [acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy] About motivation
> > >
> > > This crucial distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation was,
in
> > > earlier times, exactly a main cause of war between behavioristic and
> > > "humanistic" approaches.
> > >
> > > For Maslow (or at least how I read him) intrinsic motivation came to the
> > > foreground, after "deficiency needs" had been sufficiently met.
> > > I think he was wrong here - and that our clients who "drive their bus
despite
> > > the bastards" show him wrong every day.
> > >
> > > My question is: has there ever been a written ACT rebuttal of Maslow's
model?
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > A somewhat related question, about ACT and the workplace:
> > >
> > > Is there a book in the pireline that's more accessible than the 2006 book
for
> > > those not knowledgeable about behaviorism?
> > >
> > > I'm sure that ACT has lots to offer to companies/ managers, and an easier
and
> > > more reader-friendly book could make a huge difference, I think.
> > >
> > > Best to all,
> > >
> > > Maarten
> > >
> > > -------- Message d'origine--------
> > > De: acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy%40yahoogroups.com>
> > > <mailto:acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy%40yahoogroups.com> de la part de
Thomas
> > > Gustavsson
> > > Date: mar. 03/11/2009 19:08
> > > À: Maarten Aalberse
> > > Cc: Kevin Polk; acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy%40yahoogroups.com>
> > > <mailto:acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy%40yahoogroups.com>
> > > Objet : Re: RE : [acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy] About motivation
> > >
> > > Hi
> > > Well I would say that values v/s tracking would be one way. Vital
> > > personal goals v/s rules another way to view the same distinction.
> > > Positive v/s aversive control another more Skinnerian way.
> > > Best!
> > > Thomas
> > > 3 nov 2009 kl. 18.55 skrev Maarten Aalberse:
> > >
> > >> > Interesting!
> > >> >
> > >> > What would be an easy to understand description of intrinsic resp.
> > >> > extrinsic incentives?
> > >> >
> > >> > Best to all,
> > >> >
> > >> > Maarten
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > -------- Message d'origine--------
> > >> > De: acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy%40yahoogroups.com>
> > >> <mailto:acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy%40yahoogroups.com> de la part de
> > >> > Kevin Polk
> > >> > Date: mar. 03/11/2009 17:25
> > >> > À: Thomas Gustavsson
> > >> > Cc: acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy%40yahoogroups.com>
> > >> <mailto:acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy%40yahoogroups.com>
> > >> > Objet : Re: [acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy] About motivation
> > >> >
> > >> > Thomas,
> > >> >
> > >> > Thanks for the link to the video.
> > >> >
> > >> > Yes, we can help people notice the difference between intrinsic and
> > >> > extrinsic incentives.
> > >> >
> > >> > Take care,
> > >> >
> > >> > Kevin
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >
> > > ___________________
> > > PSYKOLOGPARTNERS
> > > Thomas Gustavsson leg psykolog, Regionchef SYD/DK
> > > 042-400 45 50
> > > thomas.gustavsson@
> > > <mailto:thomas.gustavsson%40psykologpartners.se>
> > > Besöksadresser:
> > > Kalendegatan 20 Malmö
> > > Norra strandgatan 13 Helsingborg
> > > www.psykologpartners.se
> > >
> > > __________ Información de ESET NOD32 Antivirus, versión de la base de
firmas
> > > de virus 4571 (20091104) __________
> > >
> > > ESET NOD32 Antivirus ha comprobado este mensaje.
> > >
> > > http://www.eset.com <http://www.eset.com>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> > > --
> > > Benjamin Schoendorff MA MSc
> > > Psychologue, Psychothérapeute, Master en Neuropsychologie
> > > Thérapies Comportementales et Cognitives, Thérapie d¹Acceptation et
> > > d¹Engagement
> > > Cabinet Calypsy, 171 cours Lafayette, 69006 Lyon
> > > Tel: +33(0)627683330
> > > Site de mon livre : http://fairefacealasouffrance.com/
<http://fairefacealasouffrance.com/>
> > > Mon blog: http://souffranceaction.blogspot.com/
<http://souffranceaction.blogspot.com/>
> > > Site dont je suis le webmestre: http://afforthecc.org
<http://afforthecc.org>
> > >
> > > ATTENTION :
> > > - Le contenu de ce courriel est confidentiel et ne peut être lu ou
divulgué
> > > par d'autres que son auteur ou destinataire.
> > > - Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire de ce courriel ou bien si vous
l'avez
> > > reçu par erreur, merci de le retourner à benjamin.schoendorff@ et
> > > d'en détruire toute copie.
> > > - Si vous choisissez d¹utiliser le courrier électronique pour
communiquer avec
> > > moi sur vos difficultés, sachez que l¹email n¹est pas considéré comme
un mode
> > > de communication complètement sécurisé.
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> Dit bericht wordt verzonden vanuit een e-mailadres voor professioneel gebruik.
De verantwoordelijken binnen de organisatie kunnen kennis nemen van alle
berichten verzonden naar dit adres.
> Le présent message est envoyé d'une adresse e-mail pour usage professionnel.
Les responsables de l'organisation peuvent prendre connaissance de tous les
messages envoyés à cette adresse.
> This message is sent from an e-mail address for professional use only. The
persons in charge of the organisation may take note of all messages sent to this
address.
>

Offtopic on trauma but ontopic on category specific AAQ-II's: I've created a
pain specific AAQ-II (called it the AAQ-II-P) and am doing research with it as
we speak. The questionnaire is being applied in several pain clinics and I'm in
the phase of receiving data from a normal population, for validation reasons. I
expect a paper to be submitted within the comming months.

Best,
Marco

No psychometric data that I'm aware of. A group of trauma "experts" came up with the questions and vetted them with colleagues. But I don't think it has gotten to the pilot or validation phase, unless there are recent efforts of which I'm not aware.

Would love to have someone take this on!!!

Sonja

-----Original Message-----
From: Jonathan Weinstein
Sent: Oct 19, 2009 3:26 PM
To: acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy] AAQ-TS

 

I am looking for psychometric data for the trauma specific AAQ (AAQ-TS). I didn't find this version of the AAQ on the ACBS website. Is there anyone out there who might be able to point me in the right direction?

 

thanks!
--
Jonathan Weinstein
Psychological Intern
Veterans Affairs Hospital Maryland Health Care Service
jonathan.h.weinstein@...
(662) 380-0247

FYI, Maarten


The Lancet, Volume 374, Issue 9702, Pages 1677 - 1686, 14 November 2009 <Previous Article|Next Article>doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(09)61457-4Cite or Link Using DOI

10-year follow-up of diabetes incidence and weight loss in the Diabetes Prevention Program Outcomes Study

Summary

Background
In the 2�8 years of the Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) randomised clinical trial, diabetes incidence in high-risk adults was reduced by 58% with intensive lifestyle intervention and by 31% with metformin, compared with placebo. We investigated the persistence of these effects in the long term.
Methods
All active DPP participants were eligible for continued follow-up. 2766 of 3150 (88%) enrolled for a median additional follow-up of 5�7 years (IQR 5�5—5�8). 910 participants were from the lifestyle, 924 from the metformin, and 932 were from the original placebo groups. On the basis of the benefits from the intensive lifestyle intervention in the DPP, all three groups were offered group-implemented lifestyle intervention. Metformin treatment was continued in the original metformin group (850 mg twice daily as tolerated), with participants unmasked to assignment, and the original lifestyle intervention group was offered additional lifestyle support. The primary outcome was development of diabetes according to American Diabetes Association criteria. Analysis was by intention-to-treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00038727.
Findings
During the 10�0-year (IQR 9�0—10�5) follow-up since randomisation to DPP, the original lifestyle group lost, then partly regained weight. The modest weight loss with metformin was maintained. Diabetes incidence rates during the DPP were 4�8 cases per 100 person-years (95% CI 4�1—5�7) in the intensive lifestyle intervention group, 7�8 (6�8—8�8) in the metformin group, and 11�0 (9�8—12�3) in the placebo group. Diabetes incidence rates in this follow-up study were similar between treatment groups: 5�9 per 100 person-years (5�1—6�8) for lifestyle, 4�9 (4�2—5�7) for metformin, and 5�6 (4�8—6�5) for placebo. Diabetes incidence in the 10 years since DPP randomisation was reduced by 34% (24—42) in the lifestyle group and 18% (7—28) in the metformin group compared with placebo.
Interpretation
During follow-up after DPP, incidences in the former placebo and metformin groups fell to equal those in the former lifestyle group, but the cumulative incidence of diabetes remained lowest in the lifestyle group. Prevention or delay of diabetes with lifestyle intervention or metformin can persist for at least 10 years.
Funding
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK).

I am looking for a therapist for a 21 year old female college student in
Providence, Rhode Island, who has Blue Cross Blue Shield Insurance. She appears
to be struggling with depression precipitated by a recent relationship break up.

Please backchannel if interested.

Mary Englert LPC
Portland, Oregon

I wanted to let you know about an Associate or Full Professor Director of
Clinical Training position we are searching for this year. If you know anyone
who might be interested please forward the announcement to them.

Associate or Full Professor
Director of Clinical Training (DCT) Position, Clinical Psychology Program

The Department of Psychology at the University of North Texas (UNT) invites
applications for a tenure track
associate or full professor to be Director of Clinical Training (DCT) of the
Clinical Psychology Program.

For complete qualifications, additional information and to apply please visit:
https://facultyjobs.unt.edu/applicants/Central?quickFind=50465

AA/ADA/EOE

ACT relevant research:

http://www.redorbit.com/news/health/1783974/scripps_team_shows_diet_switching_can_activate_brains_stress_system/index.html?source=r_health

PS eliminating "extrinsic" sugar from out diet is among the best things we can do to boost our immune system and protect us against flues of all kinds...

What if we add a little "intrinsic sweetness" to our lives?

Best to all,
Maarten

This is a truly horrible event. Research tells us that

Hi Paty

You might want to try contact Ignacio Jarero (see below), who has done a lot of work with grouptreatments of children (and parents) suffering from trauma.
I have met them some 15 years ago, and was very impressed by their work, and their care and generosity. I think they're still around...
I don't have recent contact info, but if you have difficulties contacting them, please feel free to contact me by backchannel and i'll see what I can do.

Even if some of the protocols they use might need some adaptation for these to become ACT consistent, their long experience in Latin America may be herlpful for you.

Bon courage!
Maarten

---

EMDR Integrative Group Treatment Protocol: A Postdisaster Trauma Intervention for Children and Adults

Ignacio Jarero
AMAMECRISIS, Mexico City, Mexico (IJ, LA); Colorado School of Professional Psychology, Colorado Springs, CO, USA (JH); informes@...

Lucina Artigas

John Hartung

AMAMECRISIS, Mexico City, Mexico (IJ, LA); Colorado School of Professional Psychology, Colorado Springs, CO, USA (JH)

Eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) is recognized as an effective and efficient treatment for trauma-related issues. This article describes an integrated EMDR and group treatment for children and adults traumatized by natural disasters in several Latin American countries. This protocol combines the eight standard EMDR treatment phases with a group therapy model. The hypothesis is that the resulting hybrid offers more extensive reach than did the original EMDR model, which was intended for use with individuals, and takes treatment efficacy and efficiency well beyond that expected from traditional group process. To illustrate the application of the model, one formally measured field study and nine pilot projects are described. The promising results of this intervention suggest that EMDR is an effective means of providing treatment to large groups of people impacted by large-scale traumatic events (e.g., natural disasters). Controlled research is needed to clarify this issue.

Key Words: EMDR • Latin America • natural disaster • posttraumatic stress • trauma • children


Traumatology, Vol. 12, No. 2, 121-129 (2006)
DOI: 10.1177/1534765606294561


-------- Message d'origine--------
De: acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy@yahoogroups.com de la part de Patricia Juarez
Date: jeu. 12/11/2009 03:29
�: acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy
Objet : [acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy] victims of violence in Ju�rez, Mexico





Hi everyone,



I am writing to the list to see if some of you may be willing to share ideas and/or group exercises you would recommend for a group of children (ages ranging from 8-10), who last Wednesday witnessed an execution of 4 men right behind their school backyard while they were in physical ed. They didn't actually see it, but they heard the gunshots and then found out what had happened. Now the kids are experiencing PTSD-like symptoms and behaviors, and the school asked us to go and intervene, not only with this group of kids, but with the entire elementary school (eighteen classrooms of around 40 students each), including the teachers who are themselves shocked and don't know what to do to help their students.



Given that they live in an area of the city which has a lot of problems, that the situation of violence in Ju�rez doesn't seem to be coming to an end any time soon (realistically speaking), and that I have no experience in working with kids, I would very much welcome any feedback  (back channel if you prefer).



Thank you very much in advance!





Paty Ju�rez

Mtra. Patricia Ju�rez Mendoza
Centro de Atenci�n Psicol�gica SUR�
Universidad Aut�noma de Ciudad Ju�rez

"Once we recognize that thoughts are empty, the mind will no longer have the power to deceive us."  Khyetse Rinpoche
                                         
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft's powerful SPAM protection.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/177141664/direct/01/
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/177141664/direct/01/

A fellow-traveller?

Best to all,
Maarten

Alva Noe: "Out of Our Heads: Why You Are Not Your Brain, and Other Lessons from the Biology of Consciousness",Hill and Wang; 1 edition (February 17, 2009)

"No� turns Descartes's famous statement on its head: I am, therefore I think, says No�. The author, a philosopher at UC-Berkeley, challenges the assumptions underlying neuroscientific studies of consciousness, rejecting popular mechanistic theories that our experience of the world stems from the firing of the neurons in our brains. No� (Action in Perception) argues that we are not our brains, that consciousness arises from interactions with our surroundings: Consciousness is not something that happens inside us. It is something we do or make. No� points out that many of our habits, like language, are foundational aspects of our mental experience, but at the same time many, if not most, habits are environmental in nature—we behave a particular way in a particular situation. He goes on to challenge popular theories of perception, in particular the claim that the world is just a grand illusion conjured up by the brain. Readers interested in how science can intersect with and profit from philosophy will find much food for thought in No�'s groundbreaking study." (Feb. 24)

Hi Todd and all

I find this connection between curiosity and mindful awareness very interesting and important.
And I think we can connect this with another thread, that of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation.
My take on some of your work is that for you curiosity is intrinsically motivating; or in slightly different terms, that curiosity is intrinsically reinforcing.
Do you, or anybody else, have any comments on this?


From my part, one of the things that struck me watching Kevin Polk work was, how frequently in his trauma-groups he would respond to his members sharing some stuff:
"Ah, you noticed that... Interesting!" (or: "Isn't that interesting?"). And then this interest (maybe weak at first, maybe the persons couldn't quite go along with that) would be further activated by all the "sorting-and-deriving" he engages his patients in, via the matrix.

Seems to me that this  "Ah, you noticed that... Interesting!" is reinforcing "noticing" as well as the "self that is doing the noticing", as well as highlighting (reinforcing) the intrinsic reinforcement of interest/ curiosity.
And so, key elements of mindfulness are trained in an almost "offhand", informal, playful and conversational way.

What I'd better add, here, is that for Kevin whatever the patient notices is genuinely interesting; so it's much more than just a clever set of words, his own curiosity and care "shines through", very much so.

Best to all,

Maarten


-------- Message d'origine--------
De: acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy@yahoogroups.com de la part de tkashdan@...
Date: mar. 10/11/2009 16:30
�: acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy@yahoogroups.com
Objet : [acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy] Re: Question about mindfulness and self-as-context

Hi all,

If you look at the consensus operational definitions of mindfulness (Shaprio, Bishop, Teasdale, etc.), you find that there are 2 components:

1. self-regulation of attention- the awareness component
2. the quality of one's attention- paying attention with openness and curiosity

Most self-report scales focus on the awareness component and not the openness, curiosity, and receptivity to what is being attended to. Thus, it is not surprising that the correlations are small with openness measures. The problem with Openness scales is they are black boxes filled with facets that have little to do with each other. Being imaginative? Artistic preferences and sensibilities? Daydreaming? Creativity? Put these all together and you get non-random error with artistic minded people with artificially higher scores. We only get what the items tap. I think there are benefits to moving away from the globular beast of openness to capture the exact dimensions of interest.

I have some data being written up showing a synergistic interaction between curiosity and mindful awareness in predicting receptivity to difficult emotional material (reminders of death in a terror mgmt paradigm). In fact, we are presenting a poster with these findings at ABCT next week in the mindfulness SIG.

I am not sure why people are apt to neglect curiosity and openness as parts of mindfulness, not antecedents, correlates, or consequences, but part of being mindful.

Most experimental manipulations of mindfulness focus heavily on the first component of mindfulness but don't nab the first and second components. In the ACT model, curiosity is implicitly embedded in acceptance, defusion, and self-as-context but I argue it should be made more explicit. The person who does the best job of making it explicit is Russ Harris. He has at right at the forefront with being present and doing what matters.

cheers,
Todd

--
Todd B. Kashdan, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
Department of Psychology
George Mason University
Mail Stop 3F5
Fairfax, VA  22030
Office: 703-993-9486
Fax: 703-993-1359
Lab: http://mason.gmu.edu/~tkashdan/
Homepage: http://toddkashdan.com/
Blog: huffingtonpost.com/todd-kashdan



--- In acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy@yahoogroups.com, "amielanger" <amie-langer@...> wrote:
>
> A recent article in Clinical Psychology Review titled "Mindful emotion regulation: An integrative review" (Chambers, Gullone, & Allen, 2009) includes a review of the different conceptualizations of mindfulness and emotion regulation, and then focuses on two aspects of mindfulness:
>
> 1.    nonjudgmental and nonelaborative awareness
> 2.    awareness of, or perception of, awareness itself
>
> The article delineates how mainstream psychology has thus far tended to focus more on the first process (i.e., developing nonjudgmental nonelaborative awareness) and has not engaged to any significant degree with the notion of the second (i.e., direct perception of awareness). The authors note the second process has been variously referred to as "choiceless awareness," "mental freedom," and even "cognitive defusion." Throughout the article, the authors assert that this second process has not been incorporated into mainstream mindfulness-based interventions, with the exception of MBSR. The article concludes that future research should focus more on this aspect of mindfulness because, among other things, it fosters recognition that sensory phenomena occur within awareness yet do not alter or harm that awareness, and as such, it reduces the tendency to respond to stimuli either appetitively or avoidantly.
>
> So my question is.even though ACT as a technology does not explicitly focus on this second process, is it not embedded within the notion of self-as-context (and psychological flexibility more generally)?  My mind is puzzled that the authors claim this process has been referred to as "cognitive defusion" yet do not note its inclusion in ACT, particularly given they reference ACT in other portions of the article. I am wondering if the authors do not agree that ACT incorporates this process, or if I have misunderstood the function of developing self-as-context within an ACT framework. I realize that the authors can only speak to the former, so I am hoping to get feedback from the ACT community on the latter.
>
> Thank you,
> Amie
>
>
> *****************************************
> Amie N. Langer, M.A.
> Clinical Psychology Graduate Student
> The University of Iowa
> E11 Seashore Hall
> Iowa City, IA  52246
> amie-langer@...
>

Jacqueline,

Yes, it makes sense and seems "right on" to me. And from a "bigger picture" of a
Leading Principle such as, "Be the best parent I can be," all of the stuff can
be seen as dove tailing together. Making your son's shopping experience as
pleasant as possible isn't just in the service of "have a good time," or "keep
him from being such a pain to me as he is when he as a 'bad' time." Rather, it
seems more in the service of "don't let other stuff interfere with the skills
that I think will help him life his life well." By aiming to "help them grow up"
you do things that "help them grow up" and those things are reinforcing not just
in and of themselves but because they are part and parcel of "help them grow
up." I think that is precisely Kelly's definition of values in ACT.


I'll soon be off traveling so it may be awhile before I respond again.

Best,

Hank

________________________________________
From: Jacqueline A-Tjak [a-tjak.turk@...]
Sent: Monday, November 09, 2009 11:31 PM
To: Robb, Harold B.
Cc: acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [english 100%] [Spam][english 100%] Re:
[acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy] "Without resistance"

Hi Hank,

Yes, this is helpful. Thanks. I guess that what confuses me is when I try to
understand a small operant as being values consistent. Let me check if I get
this right:

For example: Two weeks ago I went shopping with my children for clothes. The
small picture would be: the reinforcement is in having the clothes they
needed after the shopping. The big picture would be: I tried to let my kids
make their own decisions, they had their own money so they can learn to
spend it wisely, I tried to make it a pleasant enterprise (since my son
hates shopping for clothes, that takes some skill). And even that is only a
small picture because my kids will not learn to spend their money wisely
when they go shopping with their own money once. It is part of a process.
But since I know what I am doing it for, and that is mostly a verbal thing,
I will feel reinforced by the act of letting them make their own decisions,
knowing (verbally) this will probably help them to learn to do that wisely
over time.

Makes sense?

Best,

Jacqueline

-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy@yahoogroups.com] Namens Robb, Harold
B.
Verzonden: zondag 8 november 2009 18:57
CC: acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy@yahoogroups.com
Onderwerp: [english 100%] [Spam][english 100%] Re:
[acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy] "Without resistance"

Jacqueline,

"Means-ends" analysis is a relational frame. It can be arbitrarily applied
to anything. "Means" ar not somehow "inately means" and "ends" are not
somehow "inately ends;" at least not from a functionalist perspective.. The
usual BIG main feature is that "means" temporally preceed "ends." This is
why the concept of "reinforcement" is often so hard to get one's head
around. The "reinforcement" comes after, not before, the behavior and by
that "placement" tends to make the probability of the behavior more likely
in a similar context; and if it doesn't, it wasn't a "reinforcer."

When you note, "and they respond to me in an open friendly manner" might be
a "result," yes it could. And you don't have to stop the analysis there. You
can look at a "bigger" picture. "An operant" can be a big or as small as one
cares to make it. It is a "way of looking," not "the thing looked at."
Operants can have ANY size. So, you COULD stop with the "friendly manner,"
and you could look "bigger." "Be the most likable person I can be" might be
the self-chosen Leading Principle I am following, and there might be some
other Leading Principle such as "Be as conected with the folks you are with
as you can." Likely, the way, "and they respond to me in an open friendly
manner," fits with the first is likely not the way it fits with the second.
With regard to the first, the response is likely to be the whole point. With
the second, it is a "signal of connection" which links to something bigger
than the immediate response itself which is why it is a "signal" - both an
R+ and an SD+ for "more of that"  where "that" is "connecting" "stuff."

If you look at Kelly's definition, he is talking about "BIG" operants from
the point of view of "time and size." So, you will have to look at something
"long enough and wide enough" to see if what he is describing is what's
going on. The thing is, there are also short cuts because we claim that
"valued action" is vitalizing and you can contact "vitalizing" rather
quickly, either with yourself or with others. The "just going through the
motions" experience vs. the "WAY COOL" experience sort of hits you in the
face when you have enough discrimination history. You can even notice, "Well
this isn't much for me, but s/he sure seems to be getting off on it," or
vice versa.

The main point I would make is that if you make an operant analysis "big
enough" you will be able to ANALYTICALLY "break it into smaller pieces." The
"smaller pieces" aren't "real pieces," that's just how you broke it up. So
you go back to, "What was the point of breaking up that way?" If you answer,
" to find the REAL reinforcers," the heart of Functional Contnextualism has
slipped away - and it is easy to do in a system that has taught us about
"reality and how sciece cuts realty at its joints." "THERE ARE NO JOINTS!,"
he said with perhaps too much enthusiasm. :)

So, according to Kelly (and his definition seems fine enough to me), "In
ACT, values are freely chosen, verbally constructed consequences of ongoing,
dynamic, evolving patterns of activity, which establish predominant
reinforcers for that activity that are intrinsic in engagement in the valued
behavioral pattern itself." OK, if you want to see if what you are looking
at is about "values," as defined, then look "big enough" so that the
definition can apply. If you look "smaller," it can't. If you look "big" and
then "break big into smaller," don't get trapped in the "reality of the
pieces." Go back and ask what the point of making the pieces was in the
first place. If the answer is, "to find the REAL/TRUE analysis," smile, sigh
and notice, "Yea, metaphysical realism suckered me again!"

Hope this helps.

H
________________________________________
From: acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy@yahoogroups.com
[acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jacqueline
A-Tjak [a-tjak.turk@...]
Sent: Sunday, November 08, 2009 8:37 AM
To: 'Kelly Wilson'; 'William Kordonski'
Cc: acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy@yahoogroups.com; 'Maarten Aalberse'
Subject: RE: [english 100%] [Spam][english 100%] Re:
[acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy] "Without resistance"

Hi all,

I am very grateful for this discussion about reinforcement. I am confused
and hope to de-confuse.

I learned from Kelly this about values: In ACT, values are freely chosen,
verbally constructed consequences of ongoing, dynamic, evolving patterns of
activity, which establish predominant reinforcers for that activity that are
intrinsic in engagement in the valued behavioral pattern itself.

Intrinsic is explained as: Independent of results or outcome.

Here is where I get lost.

Hank wrote: 'If I am trying to have a conversation with someone and they
respond to me in an open friendly manner, that ought to be reinforcing to
me. How people respond is an intrinsic part of the action of conversing and
not something extrinsic to it.'
But that could be considered a result, right? So what confuses me is: what
do we consider a result or outcome and what not? What is a natural part of a
response pattern and what is not?

HELP!

Best,
Jacqueline


Van: acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy@yahoogroups.com] Namens Kelly Wilson
Verzonden: vrijdag 6 november 2009 21:14
Aan: William Kordonski
CC: acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy@yahoogroups.com Listserve; Maarten
Aalberse
Onderwerp: [english 100%] [Spam][english 100%] Re:
[acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy] "Without resistance"


One thing at a time please BIll. Hmmmm. Widely accepted. Dunno.
Theoretically coherent. I would argue it with anyone anytime. Try the
alternative - discrete objects or events are the reinforcers. I can readily
find examples where that just doesn't work, but that are clearly examples of
reinforcement. Here is a pretty simple explication from Mindfulness for Two
- pages 31-33 with examples of why responses as movements and stimuli as
objects are insufficiently flexible ways of speaking.

Two Common Errors in Understanding Responses and Stimuli
Two common misconceptions about responses and stimuli are that responses are
movements and stimuli are discrete objects. From a contex- tual behavioral
perspective, these are both incorrect in the most techni-

p. 31
A Clinician's Guide to Stimulus ControlMindfulness for Two
cal sense. On the response side, standing still is defined as a response if
I can demonstrate that standing still, as the response of interest, is
capable of being organized by context, which is to say, capable of being
provoked by some kind of stimulus. For example, if I give you a five-dollar
bill when you stand still and take five dollars when you move and thereby
alter the probability that you'll stand still, then "standing still" meets
our defini- tion of behavior: it's something the organism can do. Also,
standing still can be brought under contextual control-that is, it's in
dynamic inter- action with a stimulating environment.
On the stimulus side, the most common error is to think of a stimu- lus as
an object. We might, for example, see the five-dollar bill as the stimulus
that organizes behavior. In a limited sense, this is true, but a more
sophisticated way to think of this is that standing still changes the world
from one where you can't buy things to one in which, with your crisp, new
fiver, you can. It is that transition from not having the power to buy
things to having that power that organizes behavior, not the bill per se.
For example, if I gave you a billion dollars, the promise of an extra five
bucks would likely no longer organize your behavior, and you would stand
still or move as it pleased you. Or if I locked you in a cell where money
couldn't be spent or given away, five dollars (or even a billion) wouldn't
do much to organize your behavior. Why not? Because receiv- ing the
five-dollar bill in either of those two contexts wouldn't change your world
in any significant way.
In many applications, calling the five-dollar bill a reinforcer of behavior
is probably workable. (We should remember that, despite the leaps and bounds
of contemporary physics, Newton's classical mechanics work just fine in most
instances too.) However, we want a more sophis- ticated understanding of the
dynamic interaction of responding and stimulating.
Why does it matter? The distinction matters because sometimes there's no
object or immediate discrete event to which we can point. Richard Herrnstein
and Philip Hineline (1966) carried out a classic experimental example that
illustrates this point nicely. In their study, rats were placed in an
experimental chamber, and the floor of the chamber was briefly electrified
at random intervals. If the rats pressed a certain lever within the chamber,
the shocks would come at a slightly reduced, though still random, interval.
What Herrnstein and Hineline found in the experiment was that lever pressing
was maintained in the rats. We cannot understand the maintenance of the
lever pressing by appealing to the immediate effects of lever pressing. The
most common immediate effect of a lever press was that nothing would happen.
In fact, as result
P. 32

of the shocks coming at random intervals, the lever press was sometimes
followed immediately by a shock. Why did the rats press the lever? In simple
terms, the rat pressed the lever because doing so precipitated a transition
in context from one in which shocks are more frequent to one in which they
are less frequent.


best,
kelly


On Nov 6, 2009, at 2:02 PM, William Kordonski wrote:


Transition from one context to another is the rein forcer? Is this a
generally accepted view in BA?

And so, if I may look at intrinsic vs. extrinsic reinforcement: There is
really no difference.

Ex: playing a guitar for an audience vs for oneself is just a change in
context from non-playing to playing. Extrinsic then is something you can
identify in the environment to distinguish one context from another. Is that
right?

Bill

________________________________
From:
acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy@yahoogroups.com<mailto:acceptanceandcommitmen
ttherapy@yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Kelly
Wilson
Sent: Friday, November 06, 2009 9:33 AM
To: Maarten Aalberse
Cc:
acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy@yahoogroups.com<mailto:acceptanceandcommitmen
ttherapy@yahoogroups.com> Listserve
Subject: Re: [acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy] "Without resistance"



Maarten - I truly do not think anyone is in opposition to the concern you
express. There is just too much contrary evidence. People have said again
and again on the list, me too, that avoidance is not inherently bad, that
people ought to pick their own pace, that movement is always relative to the
client's values and pace.

IMO ACT in Practice is just talking about openness to experience. In my
view, openness does not involve complete and inflexible absorption - I have
seen clients who indulge in that and plenty of "feel your feelings"
therapists ready to help them do it. I have been guilty of it
myself--intoxicated by the potency of emotion. ACT is not a feel your
feelings for it's own sake therapy though. I think, and individual authors
can correct me if I am wrong, that it is probably just a matter of economy
of words.

Here is an example from behavior analysis. I train people to always always
always think of reinforcers as transit ions in context. The food pellet is
not the reinforcer for the rat's lever press. The reinforcer is the
transition in context from one in which eating is not possible to one in
which eating is possible. This conception of reinforcement is much more
flexible than an object oriented understanding of reinforcement. It allows
us to talk sensibly about both the rat lever pressing for food and the rat
lever pressing to transition from higher density of shocks to a lower
density of shocks even when any particular press might be followed by an
immediate shock. It allows for a scaling up or down or our understanding of
relevant context (molar vs molecular) without changing the analytic
sensibilities.

That said, you can find me talking about reinforcers as if they are objects
or discreet events sometimes because the transition in context language is
cumbersome. I wonder if what you are seeing is like that. I just cannot
think of any major ACT treatment develope r who would say "resisting
feelings is always pathogenic" - I can easily imagine them saying, about
avoidance, about fusion, about turning away from values, that there is a
risk involved, but not a blanket always pathogenic claim.

perhaps the discussion can serve to remind us to come back frequently to the
always contextualized, functional understanding of what is and is not
pathogenic.

anyhow, my two cents,

kelly




On Nov 6, 2009, at 2:41 AM, Maarten Aalberse wrote:







Oh dear.

With a little trepidation I come back to this diffciult discussion on
"without needless defense".

It's because in looking up something completely different, I stumbled on
this, in ACT in Practice, P; 128:

"(...) rather the aim is to embrace what is currently being felt without
resistance".

I don't think I'm playing wordgames when I say that this implies that
resistance is pathogenic.

This I can't agree with, for both theoretical and clinical reasons.

A little detail to add to the above, resistance in psychoanalysis refers to
resisting the therapist's interventions....

So where "without defense" is problematic for me, "without resistance" is
IMO even more off track.

As a little aside: "without" is dead-man's territory for me.

Best to all (really!)

Maarten


Kelly G. Wilson
205 Peabody Building
Psychology Department
University of Mississippi
Oxford, MS 38677

fax: 662.915.5398
(do not use during summer)
ph: 662.816.5189

academic homepage:
www.olemiss.edu/working/kwilson/kwilson.htm<http://www.olemiss.edu/working/k
wilson/kwilson.htm%0d%0a%20>
also check out
www.onelifellc.com<http://www.onelifellc.com/>
www.mindfulnessfortwo.com<http://www.mindfulnessfortwo.com/>






Kelly G. Wilson
205 Peabody Building
Psychology Department
University of Mississippi
Oxford, MS 38677

fax: 662.915.5398
(do not use during summer)
ph: 662.816.5189

academic homepage:
www.olemiss.edu/working/kwilson/kwilson.htm<http://www.olemiss.edu/working/k
wilson/kwilson.htm>
also check out
www.onelifellc.com<http://www.onelifellc.com/>
www.mindfulnessfortwo.com<http://www.mindfulnessfortwo.com/>









------------------------------------

To learn more about ACT, RFT, the Association for Contextual Behavioral
Science (ACBS), and the scientific and practical program we are creating
together as a world community, be sure to visit
http://www.contextualpsychology.org.

If you wish to participate in ACT/RFT/ACBS forum discussions (similar to
this list serve, but with an easily accessible permanent record)
periodically visit http://www.contextualpsychology.org/forum


-Yahoo! Groups Links

Good one, curiosity as part of the ACT model, although I think that it depends
on how you apply the model in the first place. I suppose a lot of ACT therapists
would use it implicitly. Personally, I apply the concept curiosity to one's own
mind, experiences and thoughts as part of being aware in the present and
defusing from content of thoughts in clients a lot, although I might use other
words for it (f.i. friendliness, compassion). I use curiosity a lot in treating
OCD, as part of 'being curious to the strange working of your mind and its
creativity for creating difficult thoughts', or something.

Best,
Marco

--- In acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy@yahoogroups.com, tkashdan@... wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> If you look at the consensus operational definitions of mindfulness (Shaprio,
Bishop, Teasdale, etc.), you find that there are 2 components:
>
> 1. self-regulation of attention- the awareness component
> 2. the quality of one's attention- paying attention with openness and
curiosity
>
> Most self-report scales focus on the awareness component and not the openness,
curiosity, and receptivity to what is being attended to. Thus, it is not
surprising that the correlations are small with openness measures. The problem
with Openness scales is they are black boxes filled with facets that have little
to do with each other. Being imaginative? Artistic preferences and
sensibilities? Daydreaming? Creativity? Put these all together and you get
non-random error with artistic minded people with artificially higher scores. We
only get what the items tap. I think there are benefits to moving away from the
globular beast of openness to capture the exact dimensions of interest.
>
> I have some data being written up showing a synergistic interaction between
curiosity and mindful awareness in predicting receptivity to difficult emotional
material (reminders of death in a terror mgmt paradigm). In fact, we are
presenting a poster with these findings at ABCT next week in the mindfulness
SIG.
>
> I am not sure why people are apt to neglect curiosity and openness as parts of
mindfulness, not antecedents, correlates, or consequences, but part of being
mindful.
>
> Most experimental manipulations of mindfulness focus heavily on the first
component of mindfulness but don't nab the first and second components. In the
ACT model, curiosity is implicitly embedded in acceptance, defusion, and
self-as-context but I argue it should be made more explicit. The person who does
the best job of making it explicit is Russ Harris. He has at right at the
forefront with being present and doing what matters.
>
> cheers,
> Todd
>
> --
> Todd B. Kashdan, Ph.D.
> Associate Professor
> Department of Psychology
> George Mason University
> Mail Stop 3F5
> Fairfax, VA  22030
> Office: 703-993-9486
> Fax: 703-993-1359
> Lab: http://mason.gmu.edu/~tkashdan/
> Homepage: http://toddkashdan.com/
> Blog: huffingtonpost.com/todd-kashdan
>
>
>
> --- In acceptanceandcommitmenttherapy@yahoogroups.com, "amielanger"
<amie-langer@> wrote:
> >
> > A recent article in Clinical Psychology Review titled "Mindful emotion
regulation: An integrative review" (Chambers, Gullone, & Allen, 2009) includes a
review of the different conceptualizations of mindfulness and emotion
regulation, and then focuses on two aspects of mindfulness:
> >
> > 1. nonjudgmental and nonelaborative awareness
> > 2. awareness of, or perception of, awareness itself
> >
> > The article delineates how mainstream psychology has thus far tended to
focus more on the first process (i.e., developing nonjudgmental nonelaborative
awareness) and has not engaged to any significant degree with the notion of the
second (i.e., direct perception of awareness). The authors note the second
process has been variously referred to as "choiceless awareness," "mental
freedom," and even "cognitive defusion." Throughout the article, the authors
assert that this second process has not been incorporated into mainstream
mindfulness-based interventions, with the exception of MBSR. The article
concludes that future research should focus more on this aspect of mindfulness
because, among other things, it fosters recognition that sensory phenomena occur
within awareness yet do not alter or harm that awareness, and as such, it
reduces the tendency to respond to stimuli either appetitively or avoidantly.
> >
> > So my question is�even though ACT as a technology does not explicitly focus
on this second process, is it not embedded within the notion of self-as-context
(and psychological flexibility more generally)?  My mind is puzzled that the
authors claim this process has been referred to as "cognitive defusion" yet do
not note its inclusion in ACT, particularly given they reference ACT in other
portions of the article. I am wondering if the authors do not agree that ACT
incorporates this process, or if I have misunderstood the function of developing
self-as-context within an ACT framework. I realize that the authors can only
speak to the former, so I am hoping to get feedback from the ACT community on
the latter.
> >
> > Thank you,
> > Amie
> >
> >
> > *****************************************
> > Amie N. Langer, M.A.
> > Clinical Psychology Graduate Student
> > The University of Iowa
> > E11 Seashore Hall
> > Iowa City, IA  52246
> > amie-langer@
> >
>