Cited by 103Personality Disorders and PsychopathologyAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesEating Disorders and Behaviors

Radically Open-Dialectical Behavior Therapy for Disorders of Over-Control: Signaling Matters.

Lynch, Thomas R., Hempel, Roelie J., Dunkley, Christine·2015·American Journal of Psychotherapy

Abstract

Radically Open-Dialectical Behavior Therapy (RO-DBT) is a transdiagnostic treatment designed to address a spectrum of difficult-to-treat disorders sharing similar phenotypic and genotypic features associated with maladaptive over-control-such as anorexia nervosa, chronic depression, and obsessive compulsive personality disorder. Over-control has been linked to social isolation, aloof and distant relationships, cognitive rigidity, high detailedfocused processing, risk aversion, strong needs for structure, inhibited emotional expression, and hyper-perfectionism. While resting on the dialectical underpinnings of standard DBT, the therapeutic strategies, core skills, and theoretical perspectives in RO-DBT often substantially differ. For example, RO-DBT contends that emotional loneliness secondary to low openness and social-signaling deficits represents the core problem of over-control, not emotion dysregulation. RO-DBT also significantly differs from other treatment approaches, most notably by linking the communicative functions of emotional expression to the formation of close social bonds and via skills targeting social-signaling and changing neurophysiological arousal. The aim of this paper is to provide a brief overview of the core theoretical principles and unique treatment strategies underlying RO-DBT.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1176/appi.psychotherapy.2015.69.2.141

Cites

27 of 27 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
Lynch, T. R., Hempel, R. J., & Dunkley, C.
Affiliations
  • University of Southampton (GB)
  • Southern Health NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
Venue
American Journal of Psychotherapy
Published
2015-04
Volume
69
Issue
2
Pages
141-162
ISSN
  • 0002-9564 (ISSN-L)
  • 2575-6559
OpenAlex
W2174738676
Cited by
103
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 2
FWCI
8.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Journal of Psychotherapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Department of Biotechnology, Ministry of Science and Technology, India
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Eating Disorders and Behaviors
Keywords
overcontrol, social signaling, emotional loneliness, social isolation, anorexia nervosa, chronic depression, obsessive-compulsive personality disorder, emotional expression, social bonding, transdiagnostic treatment
MeSH terms
Anorexia Nervosa, Compulsive Personality Disorder, Depression, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Social Adjustment, Social Isolation, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Expressed Emotion, Behavior Control

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