Acceptance approaches , which have been receiving increased attention within behavior therapy, seek to undermine the linkage between private events and overt behavior, rather than attempting to control the form or frequency of private events per se. Research comparing control versus acceptance strategies is limited. The present study examined the behavioral and subjective impact of a control-based versus acceptance rationale, using a cold pressor task. Subjects in the acceptance group demonstrated greater tolerance of pain compared to the controlbased and placebo groups. Only the control-based rationale targeted the subjective experience of pain but it did not differ across rationales. Results confirmed that acceptance was effective in manipulating the believability of reason giving, a key process measure. By encouraging individuals to distance themselves from their private events, acceptance methods may help reduce the use of emotional reasons to explain behavior and hence shift concern from moderating thoughts and fee lings to experiencing the consequences of one's action. Acceptance is a promising new technique. Its effect is all the more surprising given that it teaches principles (e.g., "thoughts do not cause behavior") that run counter both to the popular culture and to the dominant approaches within empirical clinical intervention.Requests for reprints should be sent to

No abstract

The current study evaluated the Brief Adjustment Scale-6 (BASE-6), a measure of general psychological adjustment. The psychometric properties of the BASE-6 are documented using 3 adult samples, including online participants (Sample 1: n ϭ 459), college students (Sample 2: n ϭ 244), and a clinical sample (Sample 3: n ϭ 296). Acceptability ratings comparing the BASE-6 to the Outcome Questionnaire-45.2 (OQ-45.2; Lambert et al., 1996) are provided. Factor analyses showed the items were well represented by a single factor, indicating a unidimensional factor structure. The BASE-6 demonstrated good internal consistency (␣ ϭ .87-.93) and there was good test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation ϭ .77) across 1 week. In Samples 1 and 2, there was moderate to high convergent validity with the OQ-45.2 total score (r ϭ .66 -.81, p Ͻ .001), and Symptom Distress (r ϭ .66 -.80, p Ͻ .001), Interpersonal (r ϭ .54 -.68, p Ͻ .001), and Social Role (r ϭ .57-.69, p Ͻ .001) subscales. In Sample 3, there was high convergent validity with the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (r ϭ .80, p Ͻ .001) and the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (r ϭ .76, p Ͻ .001). BASE-6 item and total scores were generally higher in the clinical sample compared with the nonclinical samples. Participants perceived the BASE-6 as easier to use, and more acceptable on a weekly basis compared with the OQ-45.2. Results provide preliminary evidence that the BASE-6 has acceptable psychometric properties and may show promise in the context of measurement-based care.

No abstract

No abstract