doing act research: an interactive primer for beginners
DESCRIPTION
DOING ACT RESEARCH: AN INTERACTIVE PRIMER FOR BEGINNERS. Jason Lillis, Ph.D. University of Nevada, Reno. My background. ACT trainer UNR Hayes lab graduate RCT on ACT for weight stigma/ weight control Project Coordinator on R01 ACT for suicidality - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
DOING ACT RESEARCH: AN INTERACTIVE PRIMER FOR
BEGINNERS
Jason Lillis, Ph.D.University of Nevada, Reno
My background
ACT trainer UNR Hayes lab graduate RCT on ACT for weight stigma/ weight control Project Coordinator on R01 ACT for suicidality Developed and tested ACT for prejudice
(quasi) Co-author/ therapist on ACT for MH stigma Co-author on micro-component study for
defusion Co-author ACT meta-analysis
Goals
Learn the ACT model of psychopathology Understand the ACT research literature
and its implications for designing research studies
Design an ACT empirical research study Collaboration: Lab feel Ultimately this can be whatever you
want
A few questions
Why are you at this conference? What matters?
With that in mind, what is of interest to you from a research perspective?
One thing you might want to get out of this workshop
Creating an Agenda
Background
ACT is form the BT and CBT tradition BT built on well-developed theory
Reinforcement and punishment Contingency management and Exposure
BT could not adequately deal with cognition CBT was born, explicit focus on thoughts Lead to improvements in outcomes, but
also marked a shift in the scientific approach to clinical psyc
FDA Science Model
As a result, also a new way of doing science
Treatment development based on empirical support as opposed to theory testing and basic science
Good science = empirical support ABCT mission statement Manualized Tx, well-defined disorders,
outcomes, tightly controlled studies
Problems with FDA Model
Assumes topographically defined “disorders” will lead to coherent, theoretically sensible entities i.e. psychiatric symptoms lead to true diseases DSM-V planning committee quotes
Focus on validated techniques leaves no basis for using knowledge to apply for a new problem or situation, no means to develop new techniques Disorganization and incoherence, mass validation Difficult to assimilate mountain of knowledge Difficult to extrapolate and predict based on
findings Example
Contextual Behavioral Science (CBS) An alternative, the approach followed by ACT Hey, the name of the conference! “A principle-focused, inductive strategy of
psychological system building, which emphasizes developing interventions based on theoretical models tightly linked to basic principles that are themselves constantly upgraded and evaluated.” Hayes et al, 2008
Look at key aspects of CBS
Explicate Philosophical Assumptions CBS built on Functional Contextualism Goals: prediction & influence with precision &
scope Explains a lot, applies to a lot, as simple as is
useful Pragmatic truth
What works given one’s goals (no objective truth) Science is languaging, useful or not
Focus on manipulable events Contextual variables- e.g. not thoughts and
emotions
Develop Basic and Applied Theory Basic Science: Identify manipulable factors Develop Principles Applied Science: Test precision and scope Feedback between both RFT is the basic account of language and
cognition that underlies ACT theory and methods
Examples
Develop a Model
Model of pathology and intervention tied to basic principles and theories Use of middle level terms (the ones you
know) Allows for ease of understanding and use
without full knowledge of the basic science The Operating System
Established already, though revision based on data is always possible
ACT Model in figures
The Primary ACT Model of The Primary ACT Model of PsychopathologyPsychopathology
Self asContext
Contact with the Present Moment
Defusion
Acceptance
Committed Action
Values
Psychological
Flexibility
The Primary ACT Model of TreatmentThe Primary ACT Model of Treatment
Techniques and Components Model is the foundation on which to build
techniques- grouped by process/ component Can be created, or borrowed Allows for analogue and component studies
(small, lab-based) Easy, feasible, contribute growing base of
evidence Enables early detection of inactivity,
revisions, targeting specific theoretical questions
Measuring Theoretical Processes Process of change = VERY important The link between theory, principles, and
techniques Measures that link a theoretical construct with
the phenomena or condition (e.g. psychological flex)
Important area of research Without, can’t theory test CBS/ ACT frequently uses idiographic
measures, and values adapted, specific, theoretically-consistent assessment over traditional validation
Emphasis on Mediation
Outcome studies fit here, but… Heavy emphasis on mediation ACT is a model, not a set of techniques Moving processes is the primary goal Tests coherence and utility of model Failure or success in outcomes is
meaningless without
Effectiveness, dissemination, training Early and often “What works” needs to also work in real
settings “What works” for training others? “What works” in terms of acceptability? “What works” in terms of cost-
effectiveness? Questions to ask now as opposed to later
Broad Range Testing
Generalizabilty is important- search for limits Targeting experiential avoidance should be
helpful Individual, groups, phone, internet, books, etc… Anxiety, depression, substance use… But maybe also health behavior change, or
prejudice And also for the individual, organization, and
biology This is the “scope” part It is explicitly anti-syndromal thinking
Highlight Differences
Components Mediation emphasis Scope Creation/ use of measures Early effectiveness/ training
Components
Small scale, focused Few resources needed, lab-based Allows isolation of process Test whether techniques or components
are “active” Test parameters
Defusion Masuda, Hayes, Twohig, Guerrero, & Sackett, BRAT, 2004
• Generate two highly disturbing thoughts
• Randomly assign them either to defusion (“milk, milk, milk”) or thought control (positive self-talk, positive thinking)
• Apply in an alternating treatments format
Defusion Reduces Distress and Believability
1
.6
.2
1 .4
1 .8
1 2 3 4 5 6
P e r io d s
Participan t 7
Stan
dard
ized
Lev
el o
f D
isco
mfo
rt
1
.6
.2
1 .4
1 .8
D efus ion
1 2 3 4 5 6
P e r io d s
Participan t 7
Stan
dard
ized
Lev
el o
f B
elie
vabi
lity
D isc o m fo rt B e liev ab ility
D efus ion
T hough t C on tro l
T hough t C on tro l
Cohen’s d = 1.98
(distract) and 2.63 (control)
Follow-up StudyMasuda, Hayes, Twohig, Cardinal, & Lillis (2009) BMod
AcceptanceLevitt, Brown, Orsillo, & Barlow, Behavior Therapy, 2004
60 individuals with a primary diagnosis of panic disorder with or without agoraphobia randomly assigned to one of three groups (10 min audiotape): Acceptance, Suppression, Control (irrelevant distraction)
15-minute 5.5% CO2 challenge (panic provocation)
Anxiety During the Challenge
Accept Suppress Control
0
1
2
3
4
Cohen’s d at post = .5
(suppress) and .45 (control)
Willingness to do it Again
Accept Suppress Control
0
1
2
3
4
Cohen’s d at post = .67
(suppress) and .81 (control)
Mediation
“Why” the treatment worked “Why” the treatment didn’t work Without process/ mediation, you can’t be
sure what you did, what you targeted, whether its relevant
Changes the focus from outcomes to process- allows for treatment to focus on common core processes
Broadly targeting robust processes that relate to outcomes = predict & influence w/ precision & scope
Mediation Analysis
Treatment Conditions
OutcomeMediator
Mediation Analysis
ACT Intervention
DepressionAcceptance
Mediation Analysis
ACT Treatment
Depression
Acceptancea b
c
c’
ACT for Weight, Stigma, QOLLillis, Hayes, Bunting, Masuda, 2009, Annals of BMed Randomized controlled pilot study
(N=84) 1-day ACT workshop Targeted adults trying to lose
weight and maintain weight loss ACT group vs. Wait-list Control
(TAU)
Weight Status at Follow-up
% gaining 5+ lbs
% losing 5+ lbs
35
25
15105
0
x² = 8.8, p<.003
d = 1.2130
20
AC
T
Con
trol
Stigma (WSQ)
Baseline 3 Month FU
60
40
50
AC
T
Con
trol
F = 24.3, p<.001
η2 = .23
Quality of Life (ORWELL)
Baseline 3 Month FU
60
30
45
AC
T
Con
trol
F = 27.4, p<.001
η2 = .25
Mediation Analysis: Weight Control
Treatment Conditions
BMI change
Experiential Avoidance
r = .34
p = .002
r = .54
p = .0001
r = .44
p = .0027
r = .11
p = .242
c
c’
a b
What does this tell us?
The treatment targeted experiential avoidance
Changes in experiential avoidance accounted for changes in weight, stigma, QOL.
Treatment packages targeting EA could impact relevant outcomes in other studies
Provides support for EA as a common core process
Targeting EA is relevant in area of stigma and health behavior change, should be helpful elsewhere
Areas with mediation evidence Treatment Outcome Studies Depression, OCD, Worksite Stress Rehospitalization (SMI) x2 Weight Loss, Smoking Cessation,
Diabetes Management, Epilepsy, Chronic Pain?
Scope
Goals: prediction & influence with precision & scope
Create a science more adequate to the challenge of human suffering
Should have something to say about anything that relates to behavior (i.e. almost everything)
% of people who contact mental health? 5%?
Relevant to Stigma and Prejudice?
RFT tells us that relational networks work by addition, not literal subtraction
Suppression and avoidance of cognitive content generally increases its impact, especially over time
Can ACT help?
Stigma TreatmentHayes, Bisset et al, 2004, Behavior Therapy
90 drug counselors randomly assigned to day long workshop on ACT Multicultural training Class on biological models of SA
Stigma towards clients Provider Burnout 3 Month Follow-up
Effects on Stigma
Presence of Stigmatizing Attitudes
35
40
45
50
55
60
Pre Post Follow -up
ACT
Multicultural
Control
Change in BurnoutACT
Pre-
Post
Pre-
F-up
MulticulturalEducation
4
0
-4Pre-
Post
Pre-
F-up
Pre-
Post
Pre-
F-up
Racial PrejudiceLillis and Hayes, 2007, BMod
Replicated with racial bias in a college student population
Within subject test comparing racial bias education and ACT
Alternating design 32 participants across 2 classes 90 minute class period 1 week follow up
Results
Education
-25
-15
-5
5
15
25
35
45
Pre Post Follow-Up
Bias Awareness
Bias Does not Aff ect Me
Acceptance
Defusion and Action
Positive Action
Results
ACT
-15
-5
5
15
25
35
45
Pre Post Follow-UpCh
ang
e in
Sca
le S
core
(1-
100)
Bias Awareness
Bias Does not Affect Me
Acceptance
Defusion and Action
Positive Action
Other areas: Limit testing
Psychosis, Epilepsy, Adjustment to College
Effectiveness
The Effectiveness ProjectStrosahl et al, Behavior Therapy, 1998
8 HMO therapists trained 1 yr in ACT; 10 not. The two group were self-selected, not randomized
Before training for a month all assigned clients (N=59) assessed at initial visit and 5 months later
All assigned clients (N=67) similarly assessed after 1 yr of training
No difference in average number of sessions
04/22/23
Treatment was Faster
Treatment was Cheaper
No Training
Treatment was Better
Other Important Issues
ACT targets Counterintuitive findings Incubation effects ACT measures Single case
ACT Outcome Targets
ACT model suggests that mindfulness, acceptance, defusion, self, values, and behavioral commitment is psychological flexibility = positive life functioning
Nowhere in the model is symptom reduction Nowhere in the model is syndrome amelioration This has lead to problems with acceptability and
validation in the main stream What is more convincing to you? Ultimately, me must play both games
ACT Targets
Functional improvement Sick days (chronic pain), job performance,
diabetic control, use of ESTs, health care utilization
Quality of Life Successful, vital living- consistent with values
Not “happy”, but targeting ACT processes does improve traditional targets as well Depression (BDI, Hamilton), OCD, GHQ (Psyc
distress)
Exercise
Start shaping your own idea Pairs/ Groups Pick an interesting question Goals of your study (to learn?) Identify a population Pick a setting Design a methodology Issues of practicality Consultation
Counterintuitive Findings
Related to issue of targets ACT not targeting symptoms, in fact
targeting more mindful awareness of thoughts and feelings, flexibility in relating to thoughts and feelings, and behavior tied to values
Sometimes leads to model consistent, but a-typical findings
Adopting ESTsVarra, Hayes, Roget, & Fisher, 2008, JCCP
59 drug and alcohol counselors randomly assigned to One day ACT workshop focused on defusing from the
psychological barriers to learning new treatment approaches, and acceptance of the emotions they bring up
Control condition: One day workshop on matters not linked to empirically supported treatments (EAP policies; etc)
Both groups then do a one day educational workshop (the following day) on empirically supported treatments in the drug and alcohol area focusing particularly on the use of agonists and antagonists
Frequency of Perceived Barriers to Using Empirically Supported Treatments
Pre Post
75M
ean
Sco
re
Phase
70
ACT plus ACT plus EducationEducation
Control Control plus plus
EducationEducation65
ACT group acknowledges the presence of significantly more barriers to using these treatments
p < .05
Believability of Perceived Barriers to Using Empirically Supported Treatments
Pre Post
70M
ean
Sco
re
Phase
65
ACT plus ACT plus EducationEducation
Control Control plus plus
EducationEducation
60
ACT group is significantly less likely to believe that these barriers are real
p < .05
Willingness to Use Pharmacotherapy
Pre Post
3.5
3.25
2.25
Mea
n S
core
on
1-5
Sca
le
Phase
3
2.75
2.5
ACT plus ACT plus EducationEducation
Control Control plus plus
EducationEducation2
ACT group reports being significantly more willing actually to use empirically supported treatments (pharmacotherapy score is shown)
p < .01
Subsequent Use of Pharmacotherapy
Three months later ACT group reports a large increase in actually using pharmacotherapy more frequently.
p < .001
Pre 3 month Follow - up
3.5
3.25
2.25
Phase
3
2.75
2.5
ACT plus ACT plus EducationEducation
Control Control plus plus
EducationEducation
2
Coping with Psychotic Symptoms Coping with Psychotic Symptoms Bach & Hayes, JCCP, 2002
80 S’s hospitalized with hallucinations and/or delusions randomized to either ACT or TAU
3 hours of ACT; all but one session in-patient
ACT intervention focused on acceptance and defusion from hallucinations / delusions
Impact on Rehospitalization
ACTACT
.6
.7
.8
.9
1.0
40 80 120
Days After Initial Release
Treatment as UsualTreatment as Usual
Pro
port
ion
Not
Hos
pita
lize
d
Processes of Change: Symptoms
Pre F-up
100
75
25
ControlControl
ACTACT
50
Per
cent
age
Rep
orti
ng
Sym
ptom
s
Phase
Processes of Change:Symptom Reporting and Acceptance
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%Reh
ospi
taliz
atio
n R
ate ACT TAU
Ad
mit
De
ny
Ad
mit
De
ny
Findings Summary
ACT is targeting changing one’s relationship to thoughts and feelings, in particular the willingness to experience them in the service of valued ends
Thus, participants may acknowledge more symptoms, or more barriers, but the impact on behavior is much less
This kind of finding is very cool as it is consistent with the ACT model
But keep in mind what would be predicted by the model when designing study and analyzing data
Incubation
Sometimes ACT effects are not seen at post
Severe Substance AbuseHayes, Wilson, et al, 2004
124 polysubstance abusers 3 conditions
ACT + Methadone ITSF + Methadone Methadone only
ACT + ITSF 16 weeks/ 3 sessions per week Methadone + counseling
Post 6 Mo Follow Up
Per
cent
age
Neg
ativ
e Q
As
Phase
45
55
35
25
ACTACT
MMMM
ITSFITSF
55
Objectively Assessed Opiates
Pre
Post 6 Mo Follow Up
Per
cent
age
Neg
ativ
e Q
As
Phase
45
55
35
25
ACTACT
MMMMITSFITSF
Pre
Total Drug
15
Smoking CessationGifford et al, 2004, BT
Nicotine Replacement Therapy Initial education meeting Weekly contact for assessment
Acceptance and Commitment Therapy Weekly and group meeting 10 Weeks
Outcomes
Post 1Yr Follow Up
55
45
5
Per
cent
age
Not
Sm
okin
g
Phase
35
25
15
ACTACTCompletersCompleters
AllAll
NRTNRT
AllAll
CompletersCompleters
Incubation Summary
What seems to happen: ACT lays seeds of acceptance, defusion, willingness, values and over time natural contingencies take over and patterns of behavior become larger
Post treatment is a muddy picture for outcomes
Process data is key
ACT Measures
Acceptance and Action Questionnaire (AAQ) Most widely used Experiential avoidance/ psychological
flexibility
Origin of the AAQ
Although the AAQ is often said to be a measure of experiential avoidance, the original item pool focused on all major ACT processes
These 9-16 items (depending on the version) cover a wide range of issues, including acceptance, defusion, and action
There are now 30+ studies using the AAQ, involving 6000+ participants
04/22/23
AAQ Scores Are Associated With ….
Higher anxiety More depression More overall pathology Poorer work
performance Inability to learn Substance abuse Lower quality of life Trichotillomania
History of sexual abuse High risk sexual
behavior BPD symptomatology
and depression Thought suppression Alexithymia Anxiety sensitivity Long term disability Worry
ALMOST ALMOST EVERYTHINGEVERYTHING
Quantitative Summary
All reported correlations are positive for the model BDI (8 studies) .50 SCL 90 (3 studies) .53 BAI or STAI (3 studies): .49 GHQ (3 studies): .40 Overall effect size .42
(CI: 0.40– 0.44) Hasn’t been updated in a few years
AAQ-II
ACT Measures- Specific AAQs Specific Measures adapted and used
successfully AAQD- Diabetes AAQW- Weight AAEpQ- Epilepsy BI-AAQ- Body Image CPAQ- Chronic Pain AIS- Smoking TAQ- Tinnitus VAAS- Auditory Hallucinations
AAQD- Diabetes
Other ACT Process Measures Bulls Eye (Values) PVQ (Personal Values Questionnaire) ATQ-B (Automatic Thoughts-Believability:
Fusion) CFQ (Cognitive Fusion Questionnaire) FFMQ (Five Facets Mindfulness) PMS (Philadelphia Mindfulness) AAQ measures covers acceptance, or
acceptance and defusion, or psyc flexibility
ATQ-B
Bull’s Eye
Far from
In the vicinity
Close
Bullseye
Very close
Other ACT Process Measures Also child measures Thought suppression Internalized shame Coping measures http://contextualpsychology.org/act-
specific_measures
Brief Idiographic Measures
E.g. Masuda study on defusion Distressing thought- turned into one
word Distress and Believability scales 100 millimeters, mark from low to high |------------------------------------------------|
Single Case
4 OCD patients 8 sessions of ACT w/o exposure
Obsessive Compulsive DisorderObsessive Compulsive Disorder Twohig, Masuda, & Hayes, Behavior Therapy, 2006
Days
P 2 - Hoarding
P 1 - Checking
Com
puls
ions
per
day
P 3 - Cleaning
P 4 - Checking
3 Mo FU
Summary
Pick something you care about Know CBS principles Start small, use resources (website!) Kinds of studies:
Correlational Component Measures Outcomes Mediation
Effectiveness Training Single Case Multiple baseline Limit testers
Consultation
Ideas? What can we help help with? ACT specific or broad design issues
The End
Mediation
A good way to test the significance of the difference between c and c’ is the Sobel test
The Sobel test looks at the significance of the cross-product of the a and b regression coefficients
In general a*b = c – c’ so a significant Sobel = significant mediation
Mediation
A less sophisticated way is to infer mediation from causal steps, especially that
there is a significant treatment effect on outcome treatment influences the mediator The mediator is related to outcome controlling for
treatment and treatment does not impact outcome
significantly if variability due to the indirect path is extracted
Racial PrejudiceLillis et al
Replicated with racial bias in a college student population
Within subject test (A/B/A/C/A) comparing racial bias education and ACT
16 participants in a racial differences class 90 minute class period 1 week follow up
Assessment Items
Bias Awareness I feel that I am aware of my own biases
Bias Does Not Affect Me I feel that my prejudicial thoughts are a significant
barrier to me being culturally sensitive My biases and prejudices affect how I interact with
people from different racial and ethnic backgrounds.
Assessment Items Acceptance
It is OK to have prejudiced thoughts or racial stereotypes
I try not to think negative thoughts I have about people from different racial or ethnic backgrounds.
Defusion and Action When I evaluate someone negatively, I am able to
recognize that this is just a reaction, not an objective fact.
It’s ok to have friends that I have prejudicial thoughts about from time to time.
Assessment Items
Positive Action I would attend a social event where I was the only
person of my race/ ethnic background. I believe that I am able to transcend racial boundaries
with my actions. I plan to actively seek out experiences that could expose
me to people who have a different cultural, racial, or ethnic background than me.
I am likely to join a campus organization or participate in a campus event that is focused on cultural diversity.
MODEL
MODEL
Correlation Longitudinal
Component Studies
Measure Development
Outcomes & Mediation
Effectiveness Training
Dissemination
Limit Testing Transdiagnostic