Cognitive Behavioral Therapy CBT Vs M
Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy and Motivational Interviewing
Leigh Lusignan
Walden University
CPSY 6728-4 Substance Abuse Counseling
Facilitator: Dr. Natalie Spencer
July 23, 2014
Week 8 Discussion 1
Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) vs Motivational Interviewing (MI)
Today, I will introduce the comparison between Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) and Motivational Interviewing (MI). The similarities and differences will be addressed regarding techniques and/or methods. In addition, I will explain how CBT and MI are applied to the case study selected (i.e., Jack) a heterosexual male of 64 years of age whom recently chose to seek therapy regarding his substance abuse of alcohol.
Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) According to Stevens and Smith (2013) CBT and MI can be applied for substance abuse therapy. There are similarities and differences between the two; however I will provide a rationale for combining these models. Jack’s cognitive impairment is in his decision-making (e.g., drinking although the doctor advises he must quit for his health). I believe CBT would assist Jack in self-efficacy (i.e., Jack’s believe in his ability to succeed in specific situations). The therapeutic relationship is essential as previously mentioned in other posts. CBT will challenge Jack’s life goals and offer him encouragement so he can develop a sense of belonging. Jack will perform self-exploration so that he can recognize that he has been blocking his own growth and denying himself the aspects of self-efficacy (as cited in Miller, 2005). According to Corey (2013), this approach is time-limited which focuses on specific problems (e.g., alcoholism). However, it leads to moderate insight and modification in behavior. The client will explore his feelings, share his feelings, and apply it to his socialization (Corey, 2013).
Motivational Interviewing (MI) Substance use problems such as alcoholism require MI because it is not driven by theory or model; however, it does focus on
Leigh Lusignan
Walden University
CPSY 6728-4 Substance Abuse Counseling
Facilitator: Dr. Natalie Spencer
July 23, 2014
Week 8 Discussion 1
Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) vs Motivational Interviewing (MI)
Today, I will introduce the comparison between Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) and Motivational Interviewing (MI). The similarities and differences will be addressed regarding techniques and/or methods. In addition, I will explain how CBT and MI are applied to the case study selected (i.e., Jack) a heterosexual male of 64 years of age whom recently chose to seek therapy regarding his substance abuse of alcohol.
Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) According to Stevens and Smith (2013) CBT and MI can be applied for substance abuse therapy. There are similarities and differences between the two; however I will provide a rationale for combining these models. Jack’s cognitive impairment is in his decision-making (e.g., drinking although the doctor advises he must quit for his health). I believe CBT would assist Jack in self-efficacy (i.e., Jack’s believe in his ability to succeed in specific situations). The therapeutic relationship is essential as previously mentioned in other posts. CBT will challenge Jack’s life goals and offer him encouragement so he can develop a sense of belonging. Jack will perform self-exploration so that he can recognize that he has been blocking his own growth and denying himself the aspects of self-efficacy (as cited in Miller, 2005). According to Corey (2013), this approach is time-limited which focuses on specific problems (e.g., alcoholism). However, it leads to moderate insight and modification in behavior. The client will explore his feelings, share his feelings, and apply it to his socialization (Corey, 2013).
Motivational Interviewing (MI) Substance use problems such as alcoholism require MI because it is not driven by theory or model; however, it does focus on
References: Stevens, P., & Smith, R. L. (2013). Substance Abuse Counseling Theory and Practice (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education Inc.