This study evaluated the effectiveness of Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT) for outpatients with GAD and mild depression and tested the effectiveness of REBT to an active, alternative treatment, Humanistic, Client-Centered Therapy (HCCT) in a clinical setting. The study aimed to understand whether REBT is a more effective treatment than HCCT through testing both pre-treatment and including three-month follow-up results. Thirty-one participants were assessed for overall psychopathological variables such as anxiety, depression, levels of unhealthy negative emotions and regret, activation, hope and nothingness as ontological well-being (OWB) variables before and after a 12 week intervention as well as during a three-month follow-up. We randomly assigned participants to either REBT or HCCT. The psychotherapists followed strict guidelines to incorporate the distinctive features of REBT. This included educating clients about irrational and rational beliefs, introducing the binary model of emotional distress, using a range of disputing techniques (logical, philosophic, and functional), and discussing alternative rational beliefs such as unconditional acceptance of self, others, and life. The HCCT group was treated with Rogerian techniques such as unconditional positive regard, accepting negative emotions, and reflection. The clients completed the Beck Depression Inventory, Beck Anxiety Inventory, Shortened Attitude and Beliefs Scale, the Ontological Well-being Scale, and the healthy and unhealthy negative emotions scale. The outcomes were analyzed using split plot ANOVA with post hoc, Reliable Change Index, and Clinical Significance Change Index. Although split-plot ANOVA results showed that there was not significant difference in main effect of treatment between REBT and HCCT groups, further detailed analysis such as main effect of time, time by interaction values, Reliable Change Indices, clinically significant change analysis, and post hoc indicated that REBT treatment was more beneficial than HCCT treatment at any of the three time points in most variables. Another experimental study with larger sample is needed to confirm the result in future studies.

本研究评估了理性情绪行为疗法 (REBT) 对患有 GAD 和轻度抑郁症的门诊患者的有效性，并在临床环境中测试了 REBT 对积极的替代治疗、以人为本的以客户为中心的治疗 (HCCT) 的有效性。该研究旨在通过测试治疗前和包括三个月的随访结果来了解 REBT 是否是比 HCCT 更有效的治疗方法。在 12 周干预前后以及干预期间，对 31 名参与者的整体心理病理变量进行了评估，例如焦虑、抑郁、不健康的负面情绪和后悔、激活、希望和虚无作为本体幸福 (OWB) 变量。三个月的随访。我们将参与者随机分配到 REBT 或 HCCT。心理治疗师遵循严格的指导方针，以融入 REBT 的独特特征。这包括教育客户关于非理性和理性信念，引入情绪困扰的二元模型，使用一系列争论技术（逻辑、哲学和功能），并讨论替代理性信念，如无条件接受自我、他人和生活。HCCT 组采用 Rogerian 技术进行治疗，例如无条件积极关注、接受消极情绪和反思。客户完成了贝克抑郁量表、贝克焦虑量表、缩短的态度和信念量表、本体幸福量表以及健康和不健康的负面情绪量表。使用带有事后可靠变化指数的裂区 ANOVA 分析结果，和临床意义变化指数。尽管裂区 ANOVA 结果显示 REBT 和 HCCT 组之间治疗的主效应没有显着差异，但进一步详细分析如时间的主效应、时间与相互作用值、可靠变化指数、临床显着变化分析和后hoc 表明在大多数变量的三个时间点中的任何一个，REBT 治疗都比 HCCT 治疗更有益。需要另一项更大样本的实验研究来证实未来研究的结果。和事后表明，在大多数变量的三个时间点中的任何一个，REBT 治疗都比 HCCT 治疗更有益。需要另一项更大样本的实验研究来证实未来研究的结果。和事后表明，在大多数变量的三个时间点中的任何一个，REBT 治疗都比 HCCT 治疗更有益。需要另一项更大样本的实验研究来证实未来研究的结果。