Cited by 36Mindfulness and Compassion InterventionsDigital Mental Health InterventionsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Comparing Cognitive Defusion and Cognitive Restructuring Delivered Through a Mobile App for Individuals High in Self-Criticism

Levin, Michael E., Haeger, Jack, An, Woolee, Twohig, Michael P.·2018·Cognitive Therapy and Research

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10608-018-9944-3

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • The utility of cognitive restructuring and cognitive defusion for mental health is supported by global correlations in self-report measures, laboratory studies, and clinical trials, and both processes have some initial support as mediators of therapeutic change.

    “The utility of cognitive restructuring and cognitive defusion for mental health is supported by global correlations in self-report measures (Aldao & Nolen-Hoeksema, 2010; Krafft et al., 2019), laboratory studies (Deacon et al., 2011; Levin et al., 2012), and clinical trials (Levin, Haeger, et al., 2018; Wampold et al., 2002), and both processes have some initial support as mediators of thera”
  • Other studies have found approximately equivalent positive outcomes between cognitive defusion and cognitive restructuring, albeit with potential differences in underlying processes of change.

    “It should be noted that other studies have found approximately equivalent positive outcomes between the two, albeit with potential differences in underlying processes of change (Barrera et al., 2016; Deacon et al., 2011; Levin, Haeger, et al., 2018; Yovel et al., 2014).”
  • A 30-min web-based cognitive defusion program for negative self-referential thinking in adolescents resulted in large reductions in the believability of, and distress associated with, self-critical thoughts (d = 0.87-1.35), but neither this study nor similar ones recorded changes in trait cognitive fusion or decentering.

    “This resulted in large reductions in the believability of, and distress associated with, self-critical thoughts (d = 0.87–1.35).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 43 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Levin, M. E., Haeger, J., An, W., & Twohig, M. P.
Affiliations
Utah State University (US)
Corresponding author
Levin, Michael E.
Venue
Cognitive Therapy and Research
Published
2018-07-13
Volume
42
Issue
6
Pages
844-855
ISSN
  • 0147-5916 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-2819
OpenAlex
W2883927778
Cited by
36
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 1
FWCI
6.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Cognitive Therapy and Research (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Commons - USU (Utah State University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
cognitive defusion, cognitive restructuring, mobile application, self-criticism, decentering, self-compassion, dysfunctional attitudes, distress, change processes

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