How does ACT differ from traditional CBT interventions?
ACT is part of the behavior therapy / behavior analysis / and cognitive behavior therapy tradition writ large so it would be silly to compare ACT to CBT as a whole which ACT is part of and which ACT has been influencing. “Traditional CBT-interventions” presumably means interventions organized around the idea that thoughts cause emotions and behavior. Even that subsection encompasses a broad range of things – theoretically and procedurally, so only generalizations are possible given such a question. What is different is the philosophy, basic science, applied theory, targeted processes of change, and many of the techniques of change. That is a pretty long list and it would take volumes to fully explain them. In outline form: 1. Philosophy ACT is rooted in the pragmatic philosophy of functional contextualism, a specific variety of contextualism that has as its goal the prediction and influence of events, with precision, scope and depth. Contextualism views psychological events as ongoing
