Articles Describing the Link Between RFT and ACT

Below is a list of articles that describe the relationship between RFT and ACT such as how RFT informs the ACT theory of psychopathology and intervention. Please contact Jen Plumb at jcplumb@gmail.com if you know of additional articles that would be good to include.

• Blackledge, J. T., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2009). Core processes in acceptance & commitment therapy. In J. Blackledge, J. Ciarrochi, & F. Deane (Eds.), Acceptance and commitment therapy: Contemporary theory, research, and practice (pp. 41-58). Bowen Hills, Australia: Australian Academic Press.

• Blackledge, J. T., Moran, D. J., & Ellis, A. E. (2009). Bridging the divide: Linking basic science to applied psychotherapeutic interventions - A relational frame theory account of cognitive disputation in rational emotive behavior therapy. Journal of Rational-Emotive & Cognitive-Behavior Therapy, 27, 232-248.

• Gross, A. C., & Fox, E. J. (2009). Relational frame theory: An overview of the controversy. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 25, 87-98.

• Barnes-Holmes, D., Barnes-Holmes, Y., Hayes, S. C., & McHugh, L. (2004). Relational Frame Theory: Some Implications for Understanding and Treating Human Psychopathology. International Journal of Psychology and Psychological Therapy, 4, 355-375.

• Blackledge, J. T. (2003). An introduction to Relational Frame Theory: Basics and applications. The Behavior Analyst Today, 3(4), 421-433.

• Blackledge, J. T. (2007). Disrupting verbal processes: Cognitive defusion in Acceptance and Commitment Therapy and other Mindfulness-based Psychotherapies. The Psychological Record, 57(4), 555 - 577.

• Fletcher, L., & Hayes, S. C. (2005). Relational Frame Theory, Acceptance and Commitment Therapy, and a functional analytic definition of mindfulness. Journal of Rational-Emotive and Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy, 23(4), 315-336.

• Friman, P. C., Hayes, S. C., & Wilson, K. G. (1998). Why behavior analysts should study emotion: The example of anxiety. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 31, 137-156.

• Hayes, S. C., & Gifford, E. V. (1997). The trouble with language: experiential avoidance, rules, and the nature of verbal events.American Psychological Society, 8, 170-173.

• Hayes, S. C., & Ju, W. (1997). The applied implications of rule-governed behavior. In W. O'Donohue (Ed.), Learning and behavior therapy (pp. 374-391). New York: Allyn & Bacon.

• Hayes, S. C., & Hayes, L. J. (1992). Some clinical implications of contextualistic behaviorism: The example of cognition. Behavior Therapy, 23, 225-249.

• Hayes, S. C., & Wilson, K. G. (1993). Some applied implications of a contemporary behavior-analytic account of verbal events. The Behavior Analyst, 16, 283-301.

• Hayes, S. C., & Wilson, K. G. (1994). Acceptance and Commitment Therapy: Altering the verbal support for experiential avoidance. The Behavior Analyst, 17, 289-303.

• Hayes, S. C., & Wilson, K. G. (2000). Why it is crucial to understand thinking and feeling: An analysis and application to drug abuse. The Behavior Analyst, 23, 25-43.

• Levin, M. E., & Hayes, S. C. (2009). ACT, RFT, and contextual behavioral science. In J. T. Blackledge, J. Ciarrochi, & F. P. Deane (Eds.), Acceptance and Commitment Therapy: Contemporary research and practice (pp. 1 – 40). Sydney: Australian Academic Press.

• Torneke, N., Luciano,C., & Valdivia Salas, S. (2008). Rule-Governed Behavior and Psychological Problems. International Journal of Psychology and Psychological Therapy, 8(2), 141-156.