Assessing Processes of Change in Psychological Interventions: The Process-Based Assessment Tool (PBAT)
Abstract
The “protocols for syndromes” approach to evidence-based psychological intervention has failed the test of scientific progressivity. Process-based therapy provides an alternative model that is focused on treatment elements that target biopsychosocial processes of relevance to individual treatment goals. That shift in focus requires new, more integrative and idionomic models that identify key processes of change, using high temporal density measurement applied at the level of the person. Standard measurement validation approaches are inadequate to this challenge. The present study develops and provides a preliminary validation of a process-based assessment tool (PBAT) -- an item pool meant for intensive longitudinal clinical assessment. Developed using the Extended-Evolutionary Meta-Model of PBT and evaluated using an evolutionary algorithm appropriate for the evaluation of individual items, we administered the PBAT online to a representative sample of 598 participants (290 male; 302 female; 6 unidentified. Mage = 32.6). Analyses revealed that the PBAT distinguishes between positive and negative processes, links in theoretically coherent ways to need satisfaction and thwarting, and links to clinically relevant outcomes of sadness, anger, anxiety, stress, lack of social support, vitality, and health. The PBAT provides a beginning step towards developing a process-based tool that allows clinicians and researchers to select individual items or sets of items for individual-focused…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
It has been suggested that researchers consider a more idiographic approach to identify underlying processes of clinical change, using high temporal density and contextualized measurement applied at the level of the person.
“It has been suggested that researchers consider a more idiographic approach in order to identify underlying processes of clinical change, using high temporal density and contextualized measurement applied at the level of the person (Ciarrochi et al., 2021; Hofmann and Hayes, 2019).”
From Online ACT intervention for fibromyalgia: An exploratory study of feasibility and preliminary effectiveness with smartphone-delivered experiential sampling assessment (2022) · cites this paper as Ciarrochi et al., 2021
Different researchers have recently pointed out the limitations of analyzing processes of clinical change by exclusively relying on a nomothetic framework, with standardized measures collected in situations removed from the individual's natural context.
“Different researchers have recently pointed out the limitations of analyzing processes of clinical change by exclusively relying on a nomothetic framework, with standardized measures of process and outcome variables collected in situations removed from the individual's natural context (Ciarrochi et al., 2021; Lavefjord et al., 2021).”
From Online ACT intervention for fibromyalgia: An exploratory study of feasibility and preliminary effectiveness with smartphone-delivered experiential sampling assessment (2022) · cites this paper as Ciarrochi et al., 2021
Cites
Dimidjian, S., Hollon, S. D., Dobson, K. S., Schmaling, K. B., Kohlenberg, R. J., Addis, M. E., Gallop, R., McGlinchey, J. B., Markley, D. K., Gollan, J. K., et al. (2006) · Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-006x.74.4.658 · Cited by 1,607 · see citing works
Lack of group-to-individual generalizability is a threat to human subjects research
Fisher, A. J., Medaglia, J. D., & Jeronimus, B. F. (2018) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1711978115 · Cited by 1,099 · see citing works
Cuijpers, P., Berking, M., Andersson, G., Quigley, L., Kleiboer, A., & Dobson, K. S. (2013) · The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1177/070674371305800702 · Cited by 1,066 · see citing works
The Future of Intervention Science: Process-Based Therapy
Hofmann, S. G., & Hayes, S. C. (2019) · Clinical Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/2167702618772296 · Cited by 888 · see citing works
Self-citationFjorback, L. O., Arendt, M., Ørnbøl, E., Fink, P., & Walach, H. (2011) · Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica · doi:10.1111/j.1600-0447.2011.01704.x · Cited by 803 · see citing works
Gates, K. M., & Molenaar, P. C. M. (2012) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.06.026 · Cited by 478 · see citing works
de Mello, M. F., de Jesus Mari, J., Bacaltchuk, J., Verdeli, H., & Neugebauer, R. (2005) · European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience · doi:10.1007/s00406-004-0542-x · Cited by 346 · see citing works
The role of the individual in the coming era of process-based therapy
Hayes, S. C., Hofmann, S. G., Stanton, C. E., Carpenter, J. K., Sanford, B. T., Curtiss, J. E., & Ciarrochi, J. (2019) · Behaviour Research and Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.brat.2018.10.005 · Cited by 295 · see citing works
Self-citationBeyond linear mediation: Toward a dynamic network approach to study treatment processes
Hofmann, S. G., Curtiss, J. E., & Hayes, S. C. (2020) · Clinical Psychology Review · doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2020.101824 · Cited by 232 · see citing works
Self-citationHayes, S. C., Hofmann, S. G., & Ciarrochi, J. (2020) · Clinical Psychology Review · doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2020.101908 · Cited by 227 · see citing works
Self-citationEmotion-Focused Therapy: A Clinical Synthesis
Greenberg, L. S. (2010) · Focus · doi:10.1176/foc.8.1.foc32 · Cited by 159 · see citing works
Hayes, S. C., Merwin, R. M., McHugh, L., Sandoz, E. K., A-Tjak, J. G. L., Ruiz, F. J., Barnes-Holmes, D., Bricker, J. B., Ciarrochi, J., Dixon, M. R., et al. (2021) · Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science · doi:10.1016/j.jcbs.2021.03.007 · Cited by 136 · see citing works
Self-citationHayes, S. C., Hofmann, S. G., & Stanton, C. E. (2020) · Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science · doi:10.1016/j.jcbs.2020.08.009 · Cited by 39 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
de la Coba, P., Rodríguez-Valverde, M., & Hernández-López, M. (2022) · Internet Interventions · doi:10.1016/j.invent.2022.100561 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
“…pointed out the limitations of analyzing processes of clinical change by exclusively relying on a nomothetic framework, with standardized measures of process and outcome variables collected in situations removed from the individual's natural context (Ciarrochi et al., 2021; Lavefjord et al., 2021).”
BackgroundStangier, U., Kohl, V., Görg, N., Sendig, L., Hufschmidt, B., Bonarius, D., Nemani, A., Ebert, M., & Hofmann, S. G. (2024) · Trials · doi:10.1186/s13063-024-08689-3 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Ciarrochi, J., Hayes, S. C., Hofmann, S. G., & Sahdra, B. K.
- Affiliations
- University of Nevada, Reno (US)
- Boston University (US)
- Philipps University of Marburg (DE)
- Australian Catholic University (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Ciarrochi, Joseph
- Publisher
- Center for Open Science
- Published
- 2021-10-10
- OpenAlex
- W4250437060
- Cited by
- 8
- References
- 13
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2022: 3
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
- Keywords
- process-based therapy, change processes, intensive longitudinal data, evolutionary algorithms, need satisfaction, need thwarting, psychological intervention
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
