University of SaskatchewanHARVEST
  • Login
  • Submit Your Research
  • About
    • About HARVEST
    • Guidelines
    • Browse
      • All of HARVEST
      • Communities & Collections
      • By Issue Date
      • Authors
      • Titles
      • Subjects
      • This Collection
      • By Issue Date
      • Authors
      • Titles
      • Subjects
    • My Account
      • Login
      JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.
      View Item 
      • HARVEST
      • Electronic Theses and Dissertations
      • Graduate Theses and Dissertations
      • View Item
      • HARVEST
      • Electronic Theses and Dissertations
      • Graduate Theses and Dissertations
      • View Item

      Core beliefs assessment procedure : the development of a cognitive-behavioural case formulation method

      Thumbnail
      View/Open
      nq23903.pdf (7.402Mb)
      Date
      1996-04-01
      Author
      Louisy, Helen Jane
      Type
      Thesis
      Degree Level
      Doctoral
      Metadata
      Show full item record
      Abstract
      This research evaluated the reliability and validity of a procedure for identifying and assessing core beliefs, the Core Beliefs Assessment Procedure (CAP). The CAP comprised a semi-structured interview, set of markers, and rating system. Twenty participants were administered the CAP. Participants were clients receiving psychotherapy from a community-based mental health service. Core and peripheral case formulations were developed for each participant. Ten participants completed a second assessment session, with a different interviewer, one week later. The CAP showed strong interviewer reliability. In addition, high inter-rater reliability regarding the intensity of affect (r =.87) and the commonness (r =.96) and vividness (r =.93) of metaphor was achieved. Findings suggested that 8 of 12 markers, proposed in the study, adequately distinguished between core and peripheral self-knowledge. Interviewer ratings showed that core self-representations had significantly higher levels of affect, metaphor, and redundancy (i.e., process markers) than peripheral self-representations. Participant ratings showed that core self-representations had significantly higher levels of self-worth contingency, temporal stability, cross-situational consistency and problem relevance (i.e., content markers) than peripheral self-representations. Significant differences were not observed between core and peripheral self-representations on participant ratings of developmental primacy. The relevance of core and peripheral case formulations to the participants' problems were rated both from the perspective of participants and the participants' therapists in order to determine the validity of the CAP. Core case formulations were rated as being more relevant to the participants' problems and as having more utility for guiding treatment than peripheral case formulations. Therapists may find case formulations derived from the CAP useful for guiding treatment. Future research should test the hypothesis that a therapist following a core case formulation has greater treatment success than a therapist following a peripheral case formulation.
      Degree
      Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.)
      Department
      Psychology
      Program
      Psychology
      Committee
      Mills, John
      Copyright Date
      April 1996
      URI
      http://hdl.handle.net/10388/etd-10212004-000114
      Subject
      psychology
      case formulation
      behavioral assessment
      cognitive therapy
      behavior therapy
      Collections
      • Graduate Theses and Dissertations
      University of Saskatchewan

      University Library

      © University of Saskatchewan
      Contact Us | Disclaimer | Privacy