Over the past few weeks, we’ve published a series of posts presenting an overview of Relational Frame Theory (RFT) in terms of history and theoretical foundations. We’ve aimed to provide a basis for understanding the necessity of a theory that can help us understand how language connects us to our environment.
Two weeks ago we posted a research-round up of studies examining the relationship between psychological flexibility and employees’ mental health and work-related functioning. Psychological flexibility, the general goal of ACT, has proven to be associated with a range of favorable outcomes in the workplace setting, particularly regarding worker’s well-being and effectiveness.
Psychological flexibility, the general goal of acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT), has been proven by a convincing body of evidence to be associated with a range of favorable outcomes in the workplace setting, particularly regarding worker’s well-being and effectiveness. Studies have repeatedly shown that ACT interventions yield significant improvements in general mental health, and have shown potential for improving work performance indicators such as potential for innovation, and numbers of sick days.
One of the key differences between cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) is that ACT does not seek to change the content, frequency, or intensity of people’s unwanted thoughts, feelings and sensations