Effectiveness of the values component of ACT
Printer-friendly versionSend by email
Does anyone know of studies or other evidence for the effectiveness of the values component of ACT or even similar values exercizes that might be done in other non-ACT approaches?
Value component
You can't just do a simple component analysis in my view because the model (and the measure development fits with this idea) says that these elements all fit together. (E.g., values without defusion can't be the same as values with it -- because defusion allows greater choice, not just reasoning; etc etc)
But we now do have several good converging lines of evidence on the importance of values
Lance McCracken has a correlational study with his pain clients coming out
Tobias Lundgren and JoAnne Dahl has a mediational analysis with epileptics showing that the packed moved values and that this predicted quality of life outcomes a year later
Carmen Luciano's group and Dermot & Yvonne Barnes-Holmes's group I believe both have analoge studies of the values component
Some of the studies out there (such as the Dahl et al 2004 pain study in Behavior Therapy) were very heavily valudes focused with good outcomes
Bottom line: yes, there are some good lines of evidence
but it is still early
- S
Steven C. Hayes, University of Nevada
Value component
Just to clarify...You are saying that Lundgren and Dahl showed that changes in values were correlated with better outcomes?
Yes
Yes in some of the analyses I saw it accounted for significant variance one year later ... but this medational analysis is not in the study accepted at Epilepsia so I don't know when it will appear. Best to get up with Tobias about it
Steven C. Hayes, University of Nevada
Values
It shouldn't be surprising that Values are important. The human choice literature (self-control type studies) shows that the size of the reinforcer - what is important, of value to the subject, is the prime determinant of (choice) behaviour. That is, people work harder for what is important to them. In self-control studies the delay to reinforcement is less important in determining choice. This runs counter to popular/intuitive accounts of impulsivity, and at least in my mind links the experimental analysis of human choice behaviour with the importance of values in clinical work.
Jim Hegarty