Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2018 Mar;74(3):304-318.
doi: 10.1002/jclp.22514. Epub 2017 Sep 12.

50 years of rational-emotive and cognitive-behavioral therapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Daniel David  1   2 , Carmen Cotet  1 , Silviu Matu  1 , Cristina Mogoase  1 , Simona Stefan  1
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

50 years of rational-emotive and cognitive-behavioral therapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Daniel David et al. J Clin Psychol. 2018 Mar.

Abstract

Objective: Rational emotive behavior therapy (REBT), introduced by Albert Ellis in the late 1950s, is one of the main pillars of cognitive-behavioral therapy. Existing reviews on REBT are overdue by 10 years or more. We aimed to summarize the effectiveness and efficacy of REBT since its beginnings and investigate the alleged mechanisms of change.

Method: Systematic search identified 84 articles, out of which 68 provided data for between-group analyses and 39 for within-group analyses.

Results: We found a medium effect size of REBT compared to other interventions on outcomes (d = 0.58) and on irrational beliefs (d = 0.70), at posttest. For the within-group analyses, we obtained medium effects for both outcomes (d = 0.56) and irrational beliefs (d = 0.61). Several significant moderators emerged.

Conclusion: REBT is a sound psychological intervention. Directions for future studies are outlined, stemming from the limitations of existing ones.

Keywords: REBT; efficacy; irrational beliefs; meta-analysis; rational beliefs.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
PRISMA flow chart for manuscript identification, selection, and inclusion
Figure 2
Figure 2
Forest plot of posttest ESs stratified on comparison/control group
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Borenstein, M. , Hedges, L. V. , Higgins, J. , & Rothstein, H. R. (2009). Introduction to meta‐analysis. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
    1. Chambless, D. L. , & Hollon, S. D. (1998). Defining empirically supported therapies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 66(1), 7–18. - PubMed
    1. Cristea, I. A. , Huibers, M. J. , David, D. , Hollon, S. D. , Andersson, G. , & Cuijpers, P. (2015). The effects of cognitive behavior therapy for adult depression on dysfunctional thinking: A meta‐analysis. Clinical Psychology Review, 42, 62–71. - PubMed
    1. Cristea, I. A. , Stefan, S. , Karyotaki, E. , David, D. , Hollon, S. D. , & Cuijpers, P. (2017). The effects of cognitive behavioral therapy are not systematically falling: A revision of Johnsen and Friborg (2015). Psychological Bulletin, 143(3), 326–340. - PubMed
    1. Cuijpers, P. , Berking, M. , Andersson, G. , Quigley, L. , Kleiboer, A. , & Dobson, K. S. (2013). A meta‐analysis of cognitive‐behavioural therapy for adult depression, alone and in comparison with other treatments. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 58(7), 376–385. - PubMed

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources