No abstract

This study attempted to validate Mahoney’s classification of cognitive behavioral therapists into rationalists or constructivists and to verify his hypothesis that Rational-Emotive therapists hold more rationalist attitudes than do other cognitive behavioral therapists. It was also hypothesized that the preference for disputing irrational thoughts early in therapy would also serve to distinguish between general cognitive behavioral and RE therapists. Cognitive behavioral (CB) and RE therapists completed a questionnaire representing Mahoney’s categorization of rationalist and constructivist philosophies and the preference for disputing irrational beliefs early in therapy. Factor analysis yielded three distinct consistent factors named “rationalism,” “constructivism,” and “early disputing.” Each demonstrating adequate internal consistency. Analysis of variance indicated that RE therapists endorsed significantly more rationalist items than cognitive behavioral therapists. There were no significant group differences in the endorsement of constructivist items or disputing irrational beliefs early in therapy. General CB therapists significantly endorsed more constructivist than rationalist philosophies. Results of the study provide empirical support for Mahoney’s two-factor designation, but provide evidence indicating that rationalism and constructivism are not bipolar philosophies. Therapists can hold beliefs on each separately.

No abstract