International Research Program:
- Cognitive behavioral theory/therapy (CBT) at a country/culture/nation/society level. The cognitive-behavioral national profile
- Brief Overview
Living in a complex and globalized world, where countries/cultures/nations/societies interact more and more with one another, knowledge about the psychological profile of a nation, be it global (see Peabody, 1985-2011; Terracciano et al., 2005) and/or regional (see Rentfrow et al., 2013; 2015), can spur important (1) theoretical (e.g., to test the ABC model of CBT at national level) and (2) practical developments (e.g., to foster better communication and international peace and avoid conflicts among nations, better understanding of immigration, etc.).
CBT deals to how rational (functional) and irrational (dysfunctional) beliefs (cognitions) impact our emotions and behaviors. Both Albert Ellis (1994) and Aaron T. Beck (Beck, 2000) – the founders of CBT – envisioned two directions of research and application for CBT. Indeed, once the CBT knowledge is generated by research (e.g., by using samples and experimental designs), knowledge can be applied to (1) individuals/small groups, to understand and support human optimization/development, health promotion and prevention of psychological problems, and treatment of psychological problems and/or to (2) the larger society (e.g., countries/cultures/nations/societies), to understand and support happy and functional societies and worldwide peace.
However, the second component is less developed and/or integrated in the cross-cultural psychology movement. Therefore, cross-cultural psychology does not benefit from the extraordinary scientific potential of CBT (e.g., CBT is one of the most influential theories/practices in the current psychological science) and CBT is not related to other major cross-cultural paradigms (e.g., Hofstede’s model, Schwartz’s model, Inglehart & Welzel’s model, etc.). The present international programmatic research aims to rectify this.
- Starting – November 2015.
- Coordinators: Professor, Ph.D., Daniel David (Babeş-Bolyai University, Romania/Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, USA), Professor, Ph.D., Raymond DiGiuseppe (St. John’s University, USA), and Kristene A. Doyle, Ph.D. (Albert Ellis Institute, USA).
- Consultants: Professor, Ph.D. Aaron T. Beck (Pennsylvania University, USA), Professor, Ph.D., Jason Rentfrow (Cambridge University, UK), and Professor, Ph.D., Antonio Terracciano (Florida State University, USA).
- Researchers: A large international group of researchers – members of an international consortium – will be involved in the project.
- Albert Ellis Institute, New York, USA (http://www.albertellis.org).
o Its 21 affiliated training centers (worldwide distributed) will be invited/involved in the data collection.
o The program builds on previous research in the field, implemented by the Albert Ellis Institute, USA, and St. John’s University, USA (see here: http://albertellis.org/participate/) and coordinated by Professor, Ph.D., Raymond DiGiuseppe.
- International Institute for the Advanced Study of Psychotherapy and Applied Mental Health (http://www.psychotherapy.ro).
o Professor, Ph.D., Daniel David has been involved in clinical cross-cultural research by empirical research and/or by a large number of psychological tests adapted in Romania (e.g., David, 2003; David, 2005; Sorokowski et al., 2011).
- Selective references
Beck, A.T. (2000). Prisoners of hate: The cognitive basis of anger, hostility, and violence. Harper Collins: New York.
David, D. et al. (2003). Romanian norms for the Harvard group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 51, 66-77.
David, D., et al. (2005). An empirical investigation of Albert Ellis’ binary model of distress. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 61, 499-516.
Ellis, A. (1994). Reason and emotion in psychotherapy. Citadel: New York.
Peabody, D. (1985/2011). National Characteristics. Cambridge University Press: New York.
Rentfrow, J. et al. (2013). Divided we stand: Three psychological regions of the United States and their political, economic, social, and health correlates. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105(6), 996–1012.
Rentfrow, J. et al. (2015) Regional personality differences in Great Britain. PLoS ONE 10(3): e0122245. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0122245.
Sorokowski, P. et al. (2011). (2011). Attractiveness of leg length: report from 27 nations. Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology, 42(1), 131-139.
Terracciano, A. et al. (2005), National character does not reflect mean personality trait levels in 49 cultures, Science, 310(5745), 96‑100.