L.E. Beutler – författare

In reviewing the Contents of this Handbook edited by Freeman, Simon, Beutler, and Arkowitz, I am both impressed and gratified with the enormous strides made by cognitive­ behavior therapy since the late 1960s. A perusal of the Contents reveals that it is used with adults, children, couples, and families; it is clinically appropriate for such problems as anxiety, depression, sexual dysfunctions, and addictions; and it is employed in conjunction with psy­ chopharmacological and other psychotherapeutic interventions. It was in the mid-1960s when Breger and McGaugh published an article in the Psychological Bulletin, taking behavior therapists to task for using only classical and operant principles in devising their therapeutic interventions. Breger and McGaugh argued that the field of learning was undergoing a major revolution, paying considerably more attention to cognitive processes than had previously been the case. In short, they criticized the growing behavioral orientation for being limited in its exclusively peripheralistic orientation. At the time, behavior therapists were initially somewhat resistant to any allusion to cognitive metaphors. Indeed, my own initial reactions to the Breger and McGaugh article was quite negative. Yet, in rereading their critique, many of their suggestions now seem most appealing. No doubt, I and my behavior colleagues lacked the appropriate "cognitive set" for incorporating such contradictory information. Nonetheless, the clinical evidence for the rele­ vance of cognitive factors in the behavior change process was simply too compelling to ignore.

In reviewing the Contents of this Handbook edited by Freeman, Simon, Beutler, and Arkowitz, I am both impressed and gratified with the enormous strides made by cognitive­ behavior therapy since the late 1960s. A perusal of the Contents reveals that it is used with adults, children, couples, and families; it is clinically appropriate for such problems as anxiety, depression, sexual dysfunctions, and addictions; and it is employed in conjunction with psy­ chopharmacological and other psychotherapeutic interventions. It was in the mid-1960s when Breger and McGaugh published an article in the Psychological Bulletin, taking behavior therapists to task for using only classical and operant principles in devising their therapeutic interventions. Breger and McGaugh argued that the field of learning was undergoing a major revolution, paying considerably more attention to cognitive processes than had previously been the case. In short, they criticized the growing behavioral orientation for being limited in its exclusively peripheralistic orientation. At the time, behavior therapists were initially somewhat resistant to any allusion to cognitive metaphors. Indeed, my own initial reactions to the Breger and McGaugh article was quite negative. Yet, in rereading their critique, many of their suggestions now seem most appealing. No doubt, I and my behavior colleagues lacked the appropriate "cognitive set" for incorporating such contradictory information. Nonetheless, the clinical evidence for the rele­ vance of cognitive factors in the behavior change process was simply too compelling to ignore.