RATIONAL EMOTIVE BEHAVIOUR

THERAPY
Introduction
ABC Model

irrational
Theory of thinking
Causation
B rules
evaluating
beliefs
REBT
Inferences
Evaluations
Theory of
Change Core Beliefs
Goals of therapy
Detecting
Disputing and Effect
Discriminating
changing
Process of Debating
Therapy Cognitive
Emotive
Techniques
Behavioural
Homework

Introduction
• Dr. Albert Ellis (1950), a clinical psychologist trained in psychoanalysis, became
disillusioned with the slow progress of his clients >> observed that they tended to get
better when they changed their ways of thinking about themselves, their problems, and
the world. Ellis reasoned that therapy would progress faster if the focus was directly on the
client’s beliefs, and thus was born the method, now known as the Rational Emotive
Behaviour Therapy.
• REBT was originally called ‘Rational Therapy’, soon changed to ‘Rational-Emotive Therapy’
and again in the early 1990’s to ‘Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy’.
• REBT is one of a number of ‘cognitive-behavioural’ therapies, which, although developed
separately, have many similarities – such as Cognitive Therapy (CT), developed by
Psychiatrist Aaron Beck in the 1960’s
• REBT and CT together form the basis of the family of psychotherapies known as ‘Cognitive-
Behaviour Therapy’.
• REBT has a perspective on (1) the nature of human beings, psychological health, and
disturbance; (2) the acquisition of psychological disturbance; and (3) how such disturbance
is perpetuated.
.

Goals of therapy (Ellis, 2003)

 It is to teach people the philosophical change of accepting the rational beliefs and disputing
the irrational beliefs which would prevent them from disturbing themselves
 To help individuals think more clearly and rationally, feel more appropriately
 Act more efficiently and effectively in achieving goals of living happily
 Help people in minimizing emotional disturbances

Theory of causation  A-B-C Model

 The core of REBT is the Application of the A-B-C philosophy to the client problems.
 REBT explains the cause of patients’ distress by using this Model.

Activating Event

B - Beliefs about A: Irrational Thinking, Rules & Evaluating Beliefs

1. Irrational Thinking: What is irrational thinking?
o It blocks a person from achieving their goals
o Creates extreme emotions that persist and which distress and immobilise
o Leads to behaviours that harm oneself, others, and one’s life in general
o Distorts reality (it is a misinterpretation of what is happening and is not supported by
the available evidence)
o Contains illogical ways of evaluating oneself, others, and the world.
 Two types of disturbances
caused by Irrational beliefs

Ego disturbance Discomfort Disturbance

a) Ego disturbance
o Represents an upset to the self-image
o holding demands about “oneself”
o Results in “ego-anxiety” (ego-anxiety” – which is an ego tension resulting from the
perception that one’s “self” or personal growth is threatened)
o Leads to  avoidance of the situation of possible failure, disapproval, looking for
people for acceptance and an unassertive behaviour through fear of what others
may think or feel.
o “I must do well/ not fail/gain approval from others” which is followed by “when I
fail/ get disapproval this proves that I’m no good”.

b) Discomfort Disturbance
o Results from demands about others and about the world
e.g. ‘People must treat me right’ ; ‘circumstances under which I live must be the
way I want’
o Low frustration-tolerance (LFT): ‘The world owes me contentment and
happiness;’ or: ‘Things should be as I want them to be, and I can’t stand it when
they are not.’ Results from demands that frustration not happen, followed by
catastrophising when it does. It is based on beliefs like: ‘The world owes me
contentment and happiness;’ or: ‘Things should be as I want them to be, and I
can’t stand it when they are not.’
o Low discomfort-tolerance (LDT): ‘I should be able to feel happy all the time;’ ‘I
must be able to feel comfortable all of the time’ ;‘I must not feel bad;’ and so on.
Arises from demands that one not experience emotional or physical discomfort, with
catastrophising when discomfort does occur. It is based on beliefs like: ‘I should be able
to feel happy all the time;’ ‘I must be able to feel comfortable all of the time. Discomfort
and pain are awful and intolerable, and I must avoid them at all costs;’ ‘I must not feel
bad;’ and so on.

Discomfort anxiety
Negativity and Worrying
complaining

Discomfort
Avoidance Disturbance Secondary
leads to disturbance

Procrastination Short-range enjoyment  

 Discomfort anxiety: Emotional tension resulting from the perception that

one’s comfort or life is threatened.
 Worrying: “I must worry just in case it happens”
 Secondary disturbance: “Being anxious about being anxious”
 Short range enjoyment: Seeking immediate pleasure or avoidance of pain
at the cost of long-term stress.
 Procrastination: putting off difficult tasks or pleasant situation
 Negativity and complaining: becoming distressed over small hinderances
and setbacks, over concerned with unfairness and prone to make
comparisons between one’s own and other’s circumstances.
 Avoidance of events and circumstances that are seen as “too hard” or
“too difficult” to overcome.
 Preferential Belief Exaggerated belief

Beliefs that
lead to
Discomfort
Disturbanc
e
Musturbatory belief
Perfectionistic

 Preferential belief >> 'It is distinctly preferable for me to succeed at projects that I and
my social group consider important or else I will be definitely uncomfortable.'
 Exaggerated belief >> I had better succeed at these important projects or else I will be
exceptionally uncomfortable and miserable.'
 Musturbatory belief >> ‘I must always succeed at these important projects or else my
life will be horrible and absolutely pleasureless!'
 Perfectionistic belief >> 'I must always succeed perfectly at these important projects or
else my life will be horrible and absolutely pleasureless!'

2. Rules
o Underlying what we think in specific situations are what is known as ‘core beliefs’, which
are underlying rules that guide how people react to the events and circumstances in
their lives in general.
o Examples include:
a. I need love and approval from those significant to me – and I must avoid disapproval
from any source.
b. Things must be the way I want them to be, otherwise life will be intolerable.
c. Every problem should have an ideal solution – and it’s intolerable when one can’t be
found
d. I must worry about things that could be dangerous, unpleasant or frightening –
otherwise they might happen
3. Evaluating Beliefs:
REBT theory posits that the tendency of humans to create and hold rigid evaluative beliefs
(i.e., psychological inflexibility) about actual and inferred events lies at the heart of
disturbance. These beliefs (i.e., appraisals) are couched in the form of dogmatic “musts,”
“shoulds,” “have to’s,” and “oughts.” Ellis (1983a) argued that these absolutistic cognitions
are at the core of a philosophy of dogmatic religiosity that he claimed is the central feature
of human emotional and behavioral disturbance.

Four types of evaluative belief:

a. Demandingness: Demandingness refers to the way people hold unconditional “should”
and “absolutistic musts” – believing that certain things must or must not happen, and that
certain conditions are absolute necessities. In Beck’s model, the evaluative beliefs are more
important and seem to produce the demandingness beliefs. If the Becks’ model is correct,
and demandingness serves only as a mediator, demanding beliefs would be less important as
targets for assessment and intervention in therapy.
 b. Awfulizing: occurs when we exaggerate the consequences of past, present or future
events; seeing them as the worst that could happen. Awfulizing is characterised by
words like ‘awful’, ‘terrible’, ‘horrible’.

c. Discomfort Intolerance: often referred to as ‘can’t-stand-it’, is based on the idea that

one cannot bear some circumstance or event. It often follows awfulizing, and can
fuel demands that certain things not happen.

d. People rating (Self and others rating): refers to the process of evaluating one’s entire
self (or someone else’s); in other words, judging the total value or worth of a person.
People-rating can lead to self-downing, depression, defensiveness, grandiosity,
hostility, or overconcern with approval and disapproval

C – Consequences
‘A’ alone does not cause ‘C’ – ‘A’ triggers off ‘B’, and ‘B’ then causes ‘C’. Also, ABC episodes
do not stand alone: they run in chains, with a ‘C’ often becoming the ‘A’ of another episode

D – Disputing Beliefs: Disputation or challenge the irrational or limiting beliefs is required

for mental change to take place. Reviewing, challenging and eschewing the current beliefs
sets the person up for future success.

E – Effect of Challenging/disputing the irrational Beliefs

 When clients have disputed their irrational beliefs, they are then in a position to develop an
effective philosophy. Following the A-B-C model, helps individuals develop rational thoughts
to replace inappropriate irrational thoughts. This new effective philosophy can bring about
more productive behaviours, minimize feelings of depression and self-hatred, and bring
about satisfying and enjoyable feelings.

Process of change – Disputation as the crux of REBT

REBT is mainly concerned with helping people identify their underlying general rules (‘core
beliefs’). This involves going beyond a person’s surface inferences to their evaluations, and from
there deducing the core belief(s) on which they are likely to be operating.

• Inferences
• In everyday life, events and circumstances trigger off inferences about what is
‘going on’  we make guesses about what we think has happened, is happening,
or will be happening.
• Inferences – are regarded as significant only in the sense that they provide a
window to the evaluative thinking.
• Evaluations
• We go beyond the ‘facts’ to evaluate them in terms of what they mean to us.
• Irrational evaluations consist of one or more of the four types of beliefs listed
earlier.
• An evaluation following on from the inference described in the previous section
could be. ‘I need her to love me – because if she didn’t, this would prove I was
worthless.’
• Core beliefs
• Guiding a person’s inferences and evaluations are their underlying, general core
beliefs.
• General core belief that would apply to the inference and evaluation we are
using as our example could be. ‘For me to be worthwhile as a person I must
have someone who loves me unreservedly.’

Disputation of the irrational belief is the crux of REBT. Disputation of a belief essentially has
three parts:
I. Detecting
Detecting the beliefs is the first step into disputing.
Here, the therapist helps the client to identify their own beliefs.
 Imp. To bring out client’s awareness about his/her thoughts and beliefs.
II. Discriminating
After detecting, one has to discriminate the irrational beliefs from the rational ones.
Being aware of the “musts, “should”, “oughts” and other unrealistic demands helps
the client to learn which beliefs are rational and which are not.
III. Debating
Debating irrational beliefs helps clients change their beliefs to rational ones, which
reduces their emotional discomfort.

According to REBT, there are three kinds of disputation

I. EMPIRICAL OR SCIENTIFIC DISPUTE
One will dispute the irrational belief by looking for the scientific evidence for the
irrational belief’s validity.
Question that has to be asked is - “Where is the proof that this belief is true?”

II. FUNCTIONAL DISPUTE

The functional aspect of the irrational belief is questioned here.
Question: “Is my rational belief helping me or does it make things worse for me?”
“Does the belief help me to achieve my goals? “Is this belief helping me or hurting
me?”

III. LOGICAL DISPUTE

The client would have to introspect if the belief is rational and logical.
Question: “Is this logical? Does it ring true to common sense”?

Strategies Used in Disputing or Debating Irrational Beliefs

I. LECTURE APPROACH
Giving an explanation of why her irrational belief is self-defeating.
Obtaining feedback from the client  A simple “yes” or “no” from the client is
insufficient.
II. HUMOUR AND CREATIVE APPROACHES
 By using humour and creative approaches, such as stories and metaphors, the
therapist can maintain a relationship in which the client is open to change and not
argumentative.
III. SOCRATIC STYLE
Pointing out the lack of logic and the inconsistencies in the client’s belief,
encouraging argument from the client, so that the client does not just accept the
therapist’s point of view and instead thinks for herself.

IV. THERAPISTS’ SELF-DISCLOSURE

Therapists’ self-disclosure about how they themselves have used the A-B-C method
to deal with their own irrational beliefs can also be helpful.
Increasing familiarity

Techniques used in REBT

Cognitive techniques >>

a) Coping self-statements
b) Cost-benefit analysis
c) Psychoeducational methods
d) Teaching others
e) Problem solving

Emotive Techniques >>

a) Imagery

b) “blow-up” technique

c) Role playing

d) Shame-attacking exercises

e) Forceful self-statements

f) Forceful self-dialogue
Behavioural techniques >>

a) Activity homework

b) Reinforcements and penalties

c) Skill training