Cargando…

Metacognitive Therapy Versus Cognitive Behavioral Therapy:A Network Approach

A network perspective on mental problems represents a new alternative to the latent variable perspective. Diagnoses are assumed to refer to a causal network of observable mental problems or symptoms (observables). The observable symptoms that traditionally have been considered indicators of latent t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Johnson, Sverre Urnes, Hoffart, Asle
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6288670/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30564168
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02382
_version_ 1783379840614793216
author Johnson, Sverre Urnes
Hoffart, Asle
author_facet Johnson, Sverre Urnes
Hoffart, Asle
author_sort Johnson, Sverre Urnes
collection PubMed
description A network perspective on mental problems represents a new alternative to the latent variable perspective. Diagnoses are assumed to refer to a causal network of observable mental problems or symptoms (observables). The observable symptoms that traditionally have been considered indicators of latent traits (disorders) are taken to be directly related causal entities. Few studies have investigated how different therapies affect a network-structure of symptoms and processes. In this study, three anxiety symptoms, three depression symptoms and mechanisms in the form of cognitions, metacognitions, worry and threat monitoring were selected. The network structure over the course of therapy for metacognitive therapy (MCT) and Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) was investigated. It was hypothesized that worry, attention, and metacognition would be important nodes in MCT and that cognitions would be important in CBT. The data used in the analysis are from a RCT where 74 patients with comorbid anxiety disorders were randomized to either transdiagnostic MCT or disorder-specific CBT. Symptoms and mechanisms were measured every week. The data was analyzed using the multilevel vector autoregressive (mlVAR) model, which is currently the most developed method to analyze multivariate time series in multiple subjects and construct networks. The results indicate that there were different networks of symptoms and mechanisms in MCT and CBT. Central nodes in both treatments are worry and attention, however, the node of negative metacognitive beliefs about uncontrollability was more central in the MCT treatment. The results are consistent with predictions from the S-REF model.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6288670
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-62886702018-12-18 Metacognitive Therapy Versus Cognitive Behavioral Therapy:A Network Approach Johnson, Sverre Urnes Hoffart, Asle Front Psychol Psychology A network perspective on mental problems represents a new alternative to the latent variable perspective. Diagnoses are assumed to refer to a causal network of observable mental problems or symptoms (observables). The observable symptoms that traditionally have been considered indicators of latent traits (disorders) are taken to be directly related causal entities. Few studies have investigated how different therapies affect a network-structure of symptoms and processes. In this study, three anxiety symptoms, three depression symptoms and mechanisms in the form of cognitions, metacognitions, worry and threat monitoring were selected. The network structure over the course of therapy for metacognitive therapy (MCT) and Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) was investigated. It was hypothesized that worry, attention, and metacognition would be important nodes in MCT and that cognitions would be important in CBT. The data used in the analysis are from a RCT where 74 patients with comorbid anxiety disorders were randomized to either transdiagnostic MCT or disorder-specific CBT. Symptoms and mechanisms were measured every week. The data was analyzed using the multilevel vector autoregressive (mlVAR) model, which is currently the most developed method to analyze multivariate time series in multiple subjects and construct networks. The results indicate that there were different networks of symptoms and mechanisms in MCT and CBT. Central nodes in both treatments are worry and attention, however, the node of negative metacognitive beliefs about uncontrollability was more central in the MCT treatment. The results are consistent with predictions from the S-REF model. Frontiers Media S.A. 2018-11-30 /pmc/articles/PMC6288670/ /pubmed/30564168 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02382 Text en Copyright © 2018 Johnson and Hoffart. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Psychology
Johnson, Sverre Urnes
Hoffart, Asle
Metacognitive Therapy Versus Cognitive Behavioral Therapy:A Network Approach
title Metacognitive Therapy Versus Cognitive Behavioral Therapy:A Network Approach
title_full Metacognitive Therapy Versus Cognitive Behavioral Therapy:A Network Approach
title_fullStr Metacognitive Therapy Versus Cognitive Behavioral Therapy:A Network Approach
title_full_unstemmed Metacognitive Therapy Versus Cognitive Behavioral Therapy:A Network Approach
title_short Metacognitive Therapy Versus Cognitive Behavioral Therapy:A Network Approach
title_sort metacognitive therapy versus cognitive behavioral therapy:a network approach
topic Psychology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6288670/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30564168
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02382
work_keys_str_mv AT johnsonsverreurnes metacognitivetherapyversuscognitivebehavioraltherapyanetworkapproach
AT hoffartasle metacognitivetherapyversuscognitivebehavioraltherapyanetworkapproach