Cited by 57Digital Mental Health InterventionsMental Health Treatment and AccessAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

A qualitative study of university students' experience of Internet‐based CBT for depression

Gericke, Franco, Ebert, David D., Breet, Elsie, Auerbach, Randy P., Bantjes, Jason·2021·Counselling and Psychotherapy Research

Abstract

Internet‐based treatments for depression have the potential to promote the mental health of university students. Yet, little is known about students' experiences of Internet‐based mental health interventions (also known as e‐interventions) and the acceptability of this mode of treatment in low‐resource settings. Our aims were to investigate South African university students' experiences of using a brief semi‐guided Internet‐based cognitive behavioural therapy (iCBT) for depression and document the acceptability of this mode of psychotherapy. Data were collected via in‐depth semi‐structured interviews with students ( n = 9) who had moderate to moderately severe symptoms of depression (as assessed by the PHQ‐9) and had used a 7 session guided skills‐based iCBT intervention. Data were analysed inductively using thematic analysis, with the aid of Atlas‐ti software. Participants found the anonymity, privacy and accessibility of iCBT appealing, believing this facilitated use of the intervention and overcame stigma associated with accessing traditional campus counselling services. The intervention was helpful and facilitated self‐disclosure, emotional expression, self‐awareness and skill acquisition. However, students also reported disappointment with the lack of human contact and immediate responsiveness, articulating an expectation that the e‐intervention would mimic face‐to‐face psychotherapy. Moves to incorporate iCBT into student counselling should take account of and manage students' expectations about the ability of e‐interventions to mimic traditional therapy and/or incorporate more opportunities for human interaction.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/capr.12465

Cites

80 of 80 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gericke, F., Ebert, D. D., Breet, E., Auerbach, R. P., & Bantjes, J.
Affiliations
  • Stellenbosch University (ZA)
  • Technical University of Munich (DE)
  • Columbia University (US)
Corresponding author
Bantjes, Jason
Venue
Counselling and Psychotherapy Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2021-08-17
Volume
21
Issue
4
Pages
792-804
ISSN
  • 1473-3145 (ISSN-L)
  • 1746-1405
OpenAlex
W3194053877
Cited by
57
References
80
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 1
FWCI
8.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Counselling and Psychotherapy Research (publishedVersion)
  • mediaTUM – the media and publications repository of the Technical University Munich (Technical University Munich) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy, depression, university students, student counseling, stigma, self-disclosure, resource-limited settings, South Africa

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review