Are there any major criticisms of REBT? It usually seems that most psychology-related articles have a major section for controversies. GoodSirJava 19:34, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

hmmmm Not so many. REBT has a lot of scientific research behind it... but I will dig some. Sethie 01:11, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, how refreshing. GoodSirJava 02:55, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ellis was originally a sex therapist and his Sex Without Guilt was what initially put him on the map. Ellis was criticized for decades about his stance on "fixed" homosexuality. He later changes his views on that subject and published the reasons why.

RET has been subject to numerous criticisms in the field of psychology and Ellis has a long history of publishing and addressing those concerns. Ellis' openess to criticism is one of the things that makes him stand out amongst many of his peers. I think Ellis was also voted the second most influential psychologist of the 20th century. As soon as I can dig up some citations I'll add some of this to the article. Mr Christopher 23:16, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the ABCs in RET are a personality theory (as the article suggests), or a theory at all. The ABCs are a method of identifying irrational ideas and beliefs about events and the emotional and behavioural consequences of those beliefs. The ABCs are a means or a methodology of teaching one how to objectively evaluate their emotional state and make meaningful changes that improve their emotional well being.

It has been years since I studied RET so I'll break out a few of my books and see if I can contribute to and also clarify some of the article.

I did change the word solely to primarily because RET (Ellis) does not suggest all human emotional disturbance is the result of thoughts and beliefs. Mr Christopher 23:16, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article states "A further limitation, at a theoretical level, is that Ellis specified what the different irrational beliefs are. Cognitive therapy, on the other hand, allows the client and therapist to identify and operationally define the "irrational" beliefs themselves, thus making the therapy more tailored to that specific client."

I think we need a citation for this or simply some clarification. In just about every book he's written Ellis outlines some of the more common irrational beliefs but he in no way restricts and individual from interpreting their own moods and beliefs.

And therapy between a client and RET practitioner is very much a collaborative effort so the whole paragraph could use some fine tuning. The differences in a Cognitive therapy session and an RET therapy session would be subtle. The article suggests those distinctions are significant. Again, an RET practitioner does not tell their client how they feel or what their beliefs are, they help their client discover those for themselves. So the comparison of the RET session and the CT sessions is not very accurate. Mr Christopher 23:16, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have asked for citatations, if not, I will take the paragraph out Sethie 04:11, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have done quite a few corrections to this articles, due to what I see as incomplete over-simplified approach in explaning REBT. Especially the general logic on the relations between affect, cognition and behavior, whith Albert Ellis has explaned in a lot of articles throughout the years, better be better explaned. I recommend to do quite a bit of work on this article in the future to clean up the article to that it reflects REBT in a better bay. - 16.6.2005 - User: 152.94.23.64/81.191.24.1

great!!! Welcome aboard. Sethie 16:40, 16 June 2006 (UTC) 81.191.24.1[reply]

Sorry that I have re-wrote most of the article, but I felt that it was utmost nesessary due to the very weak standard it was in. It must probably be cleaned up even more, and I am sure that there is a few more things that must be sorted out. - 16.6.2005 - User: 152.94.23.64/81.191.24.1