Comprehend, Cope, and Connect (CCC) is a third‐wave cognitive behavioural approach developed for acute mental health services. The aim of this study was to assess feasibility and acceptability of a newly developed, manualized single‐session CCC intervention delivered face‐to‐face with service users in acute and crisis psychology services in South London. The study adopted a within‐subjects pre‐post‐test design. Participants (N = 23) were recruited from five acute psychiatric wards and a crisis resolution home treatment team. Service users had a range of diagnoses of complex and severe mental health conditions, in particular mood, personality, and psychotic disorders. Feasibility data were gathered for number of times the CCC formulation was accepted, duration of CCC intervention, clinician adherence to manualised protocol, and frequency of goal‐based activity completion. Acceptability data on pre‐ and post‐CCC mood and post‐CCC helpfulness were self‐reported by participants. Findings indicated a significant increase in positive mood (large effect) and moderate–high helpfulness rating postintervention. Most participants reported goal‐based activity completion. There was high fidelity to the protocol, high percentage of acceptance of the formulation and formulation components completed, and frequent single‐session completion. Single‐session CCC appears feasible and acceptable in acute and crisis psychology services and yields formulation‐driven goal‐based activities intended to stabilize mental health crisis. High fidelity to formulation protocol suggests broader applications for single‐session CCC, for example, to support clinical staff to manage crisis situations in their work environment or to train nonpsychologist clinicians to deliver the intervention for service users. A randomized controlled trial of single‐session CCC would increase validity and generalisability of findings.

To study the dynamic changes in cognition across the human menstrual cycle, twenty, healthy, naturally-cycling women undertook a lateralized spatial figural comparison task on twelve occasions at approximately 3–4 day intervals. Each session was conducted in laboratory conditions with response times, accuracy rates, eye movements, salivary estrogen and progesterone concentrations and Profile of Mood states questionnaire data collected on each occasion. The first two sessions of twelve for the response variables were discarded to avoid early effects of learning thereby providing 10 sessions spread across each participant's complete menstrual cycle. Salivary progesterone data for each participant was utilized to normalize each participant's data to a standard 28 day cycle. Data was analysed categorically by comparing peak progesterone (luteal phase) to low progesterone (follicular phase) to emulate two-session repeated measures typical studies. Neither a significant difference in reaction times or accuracy rates was found. Moreover no significant effect of lateral presentation was observed upon reaction times or accuracy rates although inter and intra individual variance was sizeable. We demonstrate that hormone concentrations alone cannot be used to predict the response times or accuracy rates. In contrast, we constructed a standard linear model using salivary estrogen, salivary progesterone and their respective derivative values and found these inputs to be very accurate for predicting variance observed in the reaction times for all stimuli and accuracy rates for right visual field stimuli but not left visual field stimuli. The identification of sex-hormone derivatives as predictors of cognitive behaviours is of importance. The finding suggests that there is a fundamental difference between the up-surge and decline of hormonal concentrations where previous studies typically assume all points near the peak of a hormonal surge are the same. How contradictory findings in sex-hormone research may have come about are discussed.