Emerging Approaches To Counseling Intervention Dialectical Behavior Therapy

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/258192193
Emerging Approaches to Counseling Intervention

Dialectical Behavior Therapy
Article in The Counseling Psychologist · October 2012

DOI: 10.1177/0011000011421023
CITATIONS READS
19 1,300
3 authors:
Andrada Neacsiu Erin F. Ward-Ciesielski

University of Washington Seattle Boston University
16 PUBLICATIONS 1,007 CITATIONS 30 PUBLICATIONS 186 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Marsha M Linehan
University of Washington Seattle
229 PUBLICATIONS 35,340 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Effectiveness of PTSD Treatment for Suicidal and Multi-Diagnostic Clients in Public Mental Health
(https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02615197) View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Marsha M Linehan on 04 June 2014.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

The Counseling Psychologist
http://tcp.sagepub.com/
Emerging Approaches to Counseling Intervention: Dialectical

Behavior Therapy
Andrada D. Neacsiu, Erin F. Ward-Ciesielski and Marsha M. Linehan
The Counseling Psychologist published online 4 January 2012
DOI: 10.1177/0011000011421023
The online version of this article can be found at:

http://tcp.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/01/03/0011000011421023
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
On behalf of:
Division of Counseling Psychology of the American Psychological Association
Additional services and information for The Counseling Psychologist can be found at:
Email Alerts: http://tcp.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts
Subscriptions: http://tcp.sagepub.com/subscriptions
Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav
Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
>> Proof - Jan 4, 2012
What is This?
Downloaded from tcp.sagepub.com at UNIV WASHINGTON LIBRARIES on January 6, 2012
421023
3Neacsiu et al.The Counseling Psychologist
© The Author(s) 2011
Reprints and permission:

TCPXXX10.1177/001100001142102
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
The Counseling Psychologist
Emerging Approaches XX(X) 1-30

© The Author(s) 2011
Reprints and permission:
to Counseling sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0011000011421023
Intervention: Dialectical http://tcp.sagepub.com
Behavior Therapy
Andrada D. Neacsiu,1 Erin F. Ward-Ciesielski,1

and Marsha M. Linehan1
Abstract
Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT) is a comprehensive, multimodal cognitive-
behavioral treatment originally developed for individuals who met criteria for
borderline personality disorder (BPD) who displayed suicidal tendencies. DBT
is based on behavioral theory but also includes principles of acceptance,
mindfulness, and validation. Since its development, DBT has been adapted to
various populations and has been successfully used in a wide array of settings.
This article presents the approaches used in DBT with a particular emphasis
on (a) the philosophy and assumptions on which the treatment is based, (b) the
major theoretical constructs and the DBT conceptualization of the client, (c) the
intervention and specific techniques used, (d) research supporting the theory
and treatment, and (e) the integration of diversity, culture, and social justice.
Keywords
professional issues, psychotherapy, training
Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT) is a comprehensive cognitive behavioral

treatment developed in the early 1980s (Linehan, 1987, 1989) for the comorbid
and difficult-to-treat client. The treatment was originally intended for suicidal
1
University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
Corresponding Author:
Andrada D. Neacsiu, University of Washington, Behavioral Research and Therapy Clinics,
Department of Psychology, Box 351525, Seattle, WA 98195-1525
Email: andrada@u.washington.edu

2 The Counseling Psychologist XX(X)
individuals, and it emerged when standard cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT)

failed with this population (Linehan, 1993a). The emphasis on change, typical
of CBT strategies at the time, was often perceived as invalidating by suicidal
clients who responded by withdrawing, attacking the counselor, or quitting
treatment. In addition, the competing demands of decreasing suicidality,
attending to chaotic behaviors, teaching new behavioral skills, and manag-
ing in-session distress made therapy sessions with this client population
very difficult. To address these treatment obstacles, DBT provides a compre-
hensive, multimodal treatment for suicidal individuals who meet criteria for
borderline personality disorder (BPD) that is based on behavioral theory but
also includes principles of acceptance, mindfulness, and validation (Dimeff &
Linehan, 2001; Robins, Schmidt, & Linehan, 2004).
Since its development, DBT has been applied with highly suicidal indi-
viduals meeting criteria for BPD (Linehan et al., 2006; Turner, 2000) and has
been adapted for adults meeting criteria for both BPD and substance depen-
dence (Dimeff, Comtois, & Linehan, 1998), suicidal adolescents with BPD
features (Rathus & Miller, 2002), suicidal elderly individuals who meet crite-
ria for major depressive disorder (Lynch et al., 2007), adults with eating disor-
ders (Safer, Telch, & Agras, 2001), oppositional children (Nelson-Gray et al.,
2006), victims of domestic abuse (Iverson, Shenk, & Fruzzetti, 2009), stalking
offenders (Rosenfeld et al., 2007), families of highly suicidal individuals
(Rajalin, Wickholm-Pethrus, Hursti, & Jokinen, 2009), and difficult-to-manage
correctional populations (Shelton, Sampl, Kesten, Zhang, & Trestman, 2009). The
large number of studies conducted in community settings suggests that DBT
is quite transportable across various clinical environments (e.g., Comtois,
Elwood, Holdcraft, Simpson, & Smith, 2007; Koons et al., 2001; Verheul
et al., 2003).
Philosophy and Assumptions

DBT is based on three philosophical pillars: dialectics, Zen, and behavioral
science. The treatment was initially developed from a wholly behavioral sci-
ence approach based on learning theory, social and cognitive psychology, and
other psychological research commonly supporting behavior therapy inter-
ventions. The difficulties engaging clients in the therapeutic process with such
an approach were readily apparent, leading to a search for acceptance-based
treatment strategies to balance the traditional behavioral emphasis on change
(Dimeff & Linehan, 2001).
To balance the change needed for the BPD individual’s life to improve,
DBT drew acceptance principles from the Zen philosophy. Zen followers are

Neacsiu et al. 3
encouraged to let go of attachments to what they think reality should be like

and find the middle path through means of acceptance, self-validation, and
tolerance. In this philosophy, each moment is complete and the world is
perfect as it is. The practice of acceptance, as seen from the Zen perspective,
emphasizes focusing on the current moment and seeing and accepting reality
as it is, without judgment (Robins et al., 2004).
Zen principles were added to DBT by incorporating mindfulness practice.
Mindfulness is defined as intentionally living with awareness in the present
moment, without judging or rejecting the moment and without attachment
to the moment (Linehan, 1993b). To achieve this experience, mindfulness
practices—aimed at facilitating the experience of the present moment—were
condensed into a form that counselors could teach and clients could under-
stand and use. Such practices include the nonjudgmental observing and/or
describing of objects, physical sensations, and emotions and participating fully
in experiencing a connection with the universe (Linehan, 1993b). It is impor-
tant to highlight that mindfulness is at the core of DBT. Even so, mindful-
ness in DBT is a practice rather than a philosophy. Clients and counselors
alike practice it to gain better control over their attention so that, in moments
of need, attentional control can be easily gained and effective behavior can be
more easily attained.
To put these two opposing approaches together (i.e., acceptance and change)
a dialectical philosophy emphasizing the synthesis of opposites was adopted.
With severe, multiproblem clients who frequently attempt suicide, self-injure,
or use drugs, the clinician is compelled to push for some kind of behavioral
change. At the same time, this essential movement toward change generates
the need to convey acceptance and validation of the client. Dialectics provided
the context for a synthesis of change with acceptance. From a dialectical point
of view, the push for change can happen only in the context of acceptance and
validation (Koerner & Linehan, 1992).
The dialectical worldview is based on three overarching principles (Linehan,
1993a). First, dialectical philosophy is holistic. No event in the universe can be
understood without reference to the whole and to the transactions of events
with each other. Thus, both the context of an individual’s behavior and the
wider context of his or her environment are critical for understanding each
individual. From this perspective, identity is both relational and individual.
This principle is applied in DBT by constantly searching for what is left out
(Robins et al., 2004).
Second, dialectical philosophy encapsulates opposites. Much like argu-
ments in a debate, each interpretation of reality (the “thesis”) always has a
polar opposite (the “antithesis”). In dialectics such tension is solved through

an integration of the two poles, the synthesis. Once a synthesis is reached, the
system evolves and change occurs. One example of how this is applied in
DBT is the concept of wise mind, which is seen as the synthesis between emo-
tion mind (i.e., mood dependency; the thesis) and rational mind (the antithesis;
Linehan, 1993a). For example, DBT clients often report how in the midst of a
crisis they find themselves seeing what is happening from the prisms of their
emotion. If angry, a client may interpret what other people do as an attack,
may view the whole world as having turned against him or her, and may
become hopeless and think about suicide as a way out. This is emotion mind
thinking. At the same time, clients report perceiving how they are exaggerat-
ing the situation, how other people would not get so angry, and how it would
be better if they just “got out of it.” This is rational thinking. With few skills
to integrate the emotion and the reason, clients vacillate from one extreme to
the other, struggling with the tension between these opposites. One way to
integrate the opposites and reach wise mind is to accept the emotional arousal
and the difficulty of solving the problem in this state while, at the same time,
accepting the need to problem solve. A synthesis would be to find a simple
solution that would help the client get through the intense emotions (such as
distracting or self-soothing) and return to problem solving once the emo-
tional arousal has decreased. This is wise mind thinking.
Third, a dialectical philosophy leads to continuous movement. Dialectics in
DBT is often explained using a teeter-totter analogy, with the client at one end
and the therapist at the other. The task of the therapist is to maintain the bal-
ance between himself or herself and the client in such a way that both move
toward the middle point instead of moving toward the extremes. Sometimes
the therapist has to move quickly from one side to the other to maintain bal-
ance. Similar movement is required when balancing acceptance and change
(Dimeff & Linehan, 2001).
This principle is useful with rigid mind thinking. The counselor does not
give the client a chance to become rigid on one side of the dialectic. For exam-
ple, to shift quickly between acceptance and change, the counselor may say,
I agree your life is not where you want it to be [acceptance]. So we

should work on getting it there. How can you start looking for a job
[change]? I know right now it seems like an overwhelming task [accep-
tance], but what would be one step to take in that direction [change]?
Do you have a résumé [change]?
Alternating validation and problem solving, the counselor does not allow the
patient to fall into the hopelessness of his or her situation, nor into underesti-
mating the difficulty of finding a job.

Neacsiu et al. 5
Table 1. Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT) Assumptions
Assumptions about clients

1. Clients are doing the best they can
2. Clients want to improve
3. Clients must learn new behaviors in all relevant contexts
4. Clients cannot fail in DBT
5. Clients may not have caused all of their problems, but they need to solve them
anywaysa
6. Clients need to do better, try harder, and/or be more motivated to changeb
7. The lives of suicidal borderline individuals are unbearable the way they are livedb
Assumptions about counselors and therapy
1. The most caring thing a counselor can do is help clients change in ways that
bring them closer to their own ultimate goals
2. Clarity, precision, and compassion are of the utmost importance in the conduct
of DBT
3. The therapeutic relationship is a real relationship between equals
4. Principles of behavior are universal, affecting counselors no less than clients
5. Counselors treating borderline clients need support
6. DBT counselors can fail
7. DBT can fail even when counselors do not
a. Does not apply to adolescent clients.
b. Applies to BPD clients, not necessarily to all clients (Linehan, 1993a).
In addition to the overarching assumptions derived from the philosophy of

the treatment, practical issues have led to additional basic assumptions about
clients, therapists, and therapy that were integrated into the DBT treatment
model (see Table 1). The assumptions have been replicated from Linehan’s
(1993a) original treatment manual and from the adapted manual for suicidal
adolescents (Miller, Rathus, & Linehan, 2007). For example, by adopting the
assumption that clients want to improve, both treatment providers and clients
are compelled to search for more solvable problems. A lack of motivation
becomes the absence of appropriate reinforcers in the client’s environment. As
a result, one purpose of therapy is to reduce interfering factors and set appro-
priate reinforcers so that the client can do better, try harder, and be more moti-
vated to change.
Another example is the assumption that clients must learn new behaviors
in all relevant contexts. Because many behaviors are mood dependent, clients
must learn to change their behavior under extreme moods, not only when they
are in emotional balance. This is an important treatment guideline because it
underscores the potential deleterious effects of hospitalization. In a crisis, the

principal goal of the counselor is not to save the client but to help the client
learn how to manage that crisis better. DBT counselors are reluctant to hos-
pitalize because committing a client takes the individual out the environ-
ment where he or she needs to learn new skills (i.e., managing the crisis) and
may provide inappropriate reinforcement for dysfunctional responses to cri-
sis situations.
Major Theoretical Constructs

and View of the Person
The Biosocial Theory
DBT is based on a biosocial model that posits the transaction between an
emotionally vulnerable child and an invalidating environment as the principle
etiological factor in BPD (Linehan, 1993a; Putnam & Silk, 2005). The key
vulnerability is a biological predisposition that manifests initially as impul-
sivity and leads to heightened emotional sensitivity, emotional reactivity, and
slow return to an emotional baseline (Crowell, Beauchaine, & Linehan, 2009).
The emotionally vulnerable child needs a validating environment—where
coaching in emotion management is provided—to thrive. However, a central
characteristic of the histories of many BPD individuals is an environment
with insufficient emotional validation and emotional coaching. Such environ-
ments range from the consistently invalidating environments found in the lives
of many BPD individuals who have histories of childhood trauma, neglect, or
unrealistic demands, to the highly stressed environments where caregivers—
although intending to provide sufficient nurturing—provide ineffective or
insufficient validation and coaching (Fruzzetti, Shenk, & Hoffman, 2005).
An invalidating environment punishes emotional expression, intermittently
reinforces extreme displays, or insufficiently authenticates or altogether denies
the private experience the child communicates (e.g., “you’re not sad, you’re
hungry”). Consequently, the child does not learn how to understand, label, regu-
late, or tolerate emotional responses and instead learns to oscillate between emo-
tional inhibition and extreme emotional lability. The child also fails to learn how
to solve the problems contributing to these emotional reactions and how to
manage the consequences of emotional experiences (Crowell et al., 2009).
Furthermore, rumination is hypothesized to contribute to maintaining this con-
nection between sensitivity and emotion dysregulation (Selby & Joiner, 2009).
Existing evidence supports this biosocial theory (Putnam & Silk, 2005).
When compared to controls, individuals who meet criteria for BPD have more
frequent and more acute negative emotions (Dougherty, Bjork, Huckabee,

Neacsiu et al. 7
Moeller, & Swann, 1999; Ebner-Priemer et al., 2005; Levine, Marziali, & Hood,
1997; Stein, 1996) and a tendency to recall negative events more easily than
positive events (Ebner-Priemer et al., 2006). In addition, when compared to
depressed clients, BPD clients show marked affect dysregulation (Conklin,
Bradley, & Westen, 2006; Yen, Zlotnick, & Costello, 2002). BPD individu-
als also appear to have a heightened sensitivity to fear when compared with
childhood sexual abuse victims and controls (Wagner & Linehan, 1999).
Furthermore, when compared to clients with other personality disorders, BPD
clients appear to be less willing to experience distress to pursue goal-directed
behavior (Gratz, Rosenthal, Tull, Lejuez, & Gunderson, 2006). Finally, family
involvement and increased care lead to better clinical outcomes in BPD patients
(Hooley & Hoffman, 1999).
Emotional Dysregulation
Based on the biosocial model, theorists proposed emotion dysregulation to be
a core feature of the borderline phenotype (Conklin & Westen, 2005; Linehan,
1993a; Linehan, Bohus, & Lynch, 2007; Livesley, Jang, & Vernon, 1998;
Skodol et al., 2002). In DBT, emotions are viewed as complex, involun-
tary, patterned full-system responses to internal and external stimuli. These
responses can be seen as having five subsystems that can be targeted by emo-
tion regulation processes. In a very crude simplification for illustrative pur-
poses, an emotion is (a) initially determined by an emotional vulnerability to
cues, (b) has as functional units internal and external events that serve as trig-
gers, (c) adds in response tendencies (physiological, cognitive, and experiential
tendencies and urges), (d) culminates with nonverbal and verbal expressive
responses and actions, and (e) ends with after effects of the initial emotional
“firing,” including secondary emotions. These subcomponents are not discrete.
Instead, they overlap, mingle, and interact to form the unique pattern of an
emotion (Linehan et al., 2007).
In DBT, emotion dysregulation is understood as the inability to alter or
control emotional cues, experiences, actions, verbal responses, and nonverbal
expressions under average conditions. Characteristics of this dysfunction
include excessive negative affect, difficulty controlling physiological arousal,
trouble distracting from emotional stimuli, irrational thoughts and faulty
appraisal, lack of control over impulsive emotional behaviors, difficulties
pursuing non-mood-dependent goals, and a tendency to dissociate under very
high stress (Linehan et al., 2007; Rosenthal et al., 2008). Although the the-
ory was initially developed for individuals with a BPD diagnosis, emotion
dysregulation is a core feature of many other emotional disorders such as anxiety

and depression (Kring & Werner, 2004). Therefore, similar principles apply in
understanding and working with clients displaying these symptoms.
Another critical theoretical underpinning of DBT is that self-inflicted inju-
ries (including suicide attempts), as well as most other dysfunctional behaviors,
are maladaptive attempts at solving problems in living (M. Brown, Comtois, &
Linehan, 2002; Schotte & Clum, 1987; Shneidman, 1985). Suicidal individuals
are often overwhelmed and in crisis. As a result, they use maladaptive behav-
iors to respond to this chronic state of crisis, either as an escape mechanism
(Chapman, Gratz, & Brown, 2006) or as a way to communicate the discrep-
ancy between capacity and demands facing the individual. For the “apparently
competent” person, suicidal behavior is sometimes the only means of com-
municating to others that he or she really cannot cope and needs help (Koerner
& Linehan, 1997; for a more detailed discussion of apparent competence, see
the Secondary Targets section below).
Case Formulation in DBT for BPD

As with all aspects of the treatment, DBT takes an approach to case formula-
tion that is driven by theory. Koerner and Linehan (1997) describe five critical
aspects of DBT case formulation: four stages of treatment that guide the
relevant targets of treatment, the biosocial theory of BPD, learning princi-
ples used in behavior therapy, the dialectical nature of behavioral patterns in
BPD, and a dialectical orientation to change. The majority of these constructs
within DBT have already been described elsewhere. What follows is a brief
discussion of two other constructs: the stages of treatment and the dialectical
nature of behavioral patterns in BPD, also known as secondary targets.
Four stages of treatment. Treatment in Stage I focuses on the reduction of
out-of-control behaviors that fall into three categories and are ranked in terms
of importance as follows: (a) life-threatening behaviors, (b) therapy-interfering
behaviors, (c) severe quality-of-life-interfering behaviors. Once a client has
achieved reasonable control of severely dysfunctional actions, he or she can
move to the next stage of treatment. Therapy in Stage II shifts its focus to
increase a client’s ability to experience emotions without also experiencing
trauma (Koerner & Linehan, 1992).
The goal of treatment in Stage III is to facilitate the synthesis of what has
been learned in previous stages while also increasing the client’s self-respect
and sense of connection with the world and decreasing residual problems that
interfere with the achievement of personal goals. Finally, in Stage IV, therapy
focuses on resolving the client’s residual feelings of incompleteness, which
may be present even after problems in living and other previous targets are
resolved. Clients may come into treatment at any stage and can move backward

Neacsiu et al. 9
and forward through different stages throughout treatment (Koerner &

Linehan, 1997).
Secondary targets. When working with BPD clients, a number of secondary
targets are important to consider; otherwise, these issues may impede treatment
progress. Linehan (1993a) has organized these into three dimensions, each
consisting of two poles that may be seen as opposite: emotion vulnerability
and inhibited grieving, self-invalidation and active passivity, and unrelenting
crises and apparent competence. Although these are conceptualized behavioral
patterns of BPD clients, they are presented as secondary targets in DBT because
they can impede progress on primary targets. Take, for example, a situation in
which the counselor and client conduct an assessment of dysfunctional behav-
ior and discover that the client’s self-invalidation precedes self-injury. The self-
invalidation then becomes a secondary target of treatment.
BPD clients characterized with high emotional vulnerability display a pat-
tern of (a) marked difficulty in regulating negative emotions, (b) high emo-
tional intensity, (c) slow return to baseline, and (d) a lack of awareness of this
vulnerability. Self-invalidating BPD individuals either fail to recognize their
own responses, thoughts, beliefs, and behaviors or recognize but then invali-
date them; they have standards that are too high or unreasonable and experi-
ence intense shame and self-hate. Finally, the dimension of unrelenting crisis
patterns refers to frequent and stressful negative environmental events, dis-
ruptions, and setbacks caused either by a dysfunctional life style and interper-
sonal environment or by chance (Koerner & Linehan, 1997).
At the other pole of the dimensions are more inhibited behavioral patterns.
Individuals characterized by inhibited grieving have a tendency to inhibit or
overcontrol emotional responses, especially when confronted with loss or aban-
donment. The active passivity pattern refers to a failure to engage in active prob-
lem solving, that is, a repeated experiencing of helplessness and hopelessness
that leads to active attempts to seek help from others in the environment. Last,
the apparently competent BPD individual has a tendency to appear much more
competent than he or she actually is. This results from a failure of competencies
to generalize across moods or situations as well as from a failure to display non-
verbal cues of emotional distress (McMain, Korman, & Dimeff, 2001).
Overview of Intervention
and Specific Techniques
Treatment Overview
DBT providers attend to problems of clients in two ways: by enhancing capa-
bilities and by increasing motivation. This approach is structured around five

essential functions: (a) expanding the individual’s repertoire of skilled behav-

ioral patterns and (b) ensuring that new behaviors generalize from the thera-
peutic to the natural environment. In addition, treatment functions to improve
the client’s motivation by (c) reducing reinforcement for dysfunctional behav-
iors and for high-probability responses (cognitions, emotions, actions) that inter-
fere with effective behaviors, (d) structuring the environment so that effective
behaviors, rather than dysfunctional behaviors, are reinforced, and (e) enhanc-
ing the motivation and capabilities of the therapist so that effective treatment
is rendered (Linehan, 1993a).
These five functions are served by four treatment modes: individual psy-
chotherapy, skills training group, phone coaching, and the therapist consul-
tation team. Individual psychotherapy focuses on increasing motivation.
The counselor structures motivational work around the client’s goals and
collaboratively identifies and modifies contingencies that maintain behavior
incompatible with the client’s goals. In addition, the client and the counselor
work on structuring the environment such that the client gets reinforcement
for behaviors compatible with achieving his or her goals. The importance of
structuring therapy around the client’s goals cannot be understated. DBT
helps the client achieve a life worth living, which cannot be determined by
the counselor’s goals; it can be defined only by the client’s goals and values
(Linehan, 1993a).
Changing contingencies to be more in line with building a life worth living
is often more difficult because the client lacks capabilities to implement such
change (Koerner & Linehan, 1992). Therefore, skills training concentrates on
enhancing the client’s capabilities by teaching new skills. Briefly, during the
emotion regulation training, clients learn a range of behavioral and cognitive
strategies for reducing unwanted emotional responses as well as impulsive
dysfunctional behaviors. Clients are taught how to identify and describe emo-
tions, how to stop avoiding negative emotions, and how to increase positive
emotions. Distress tolerance training teaches a number of impulse control and
self-soothing techniques aimed at surviving crises without using drugs, attempt-
ing suicide, or engaging in other dysfunctional behavior. During interpersonal
effectiveness training clients learn a variety of assertiveness skills they can use
to achieve their objectives while maintaining relationships and self-respect.
Last, clients learn mindfulness skills. This core group of skills includes wise
mind, “what” skills, and “how” skills. Wise mind can be most easily defined
as the inner wisdom within each individual. Clients are taught to acknowl-
edge the value of both cold, calculating logic and mood-dependent think-
ing. “What” skills teach clients the types of mindfulness practices—namely,
observing themselves or their immediate context, describing observations,

Neacsiu et al. 11
and participating spontaneously and completely. “How” skills explain how to

practice mindfulness—that is, nonjudgmentally, one-mindfully (completely in
the present moment), and effectively (by focusing on what works; Linehan,
1993b). In the third mode of DBT, phone coaching, the individual treatment
provider uses phone consultations to help clients generalize skills in all rel-
evant contexts.
Last, the motivation and capabilities of the treatment provider must also
be enhanced for effective treatment to occur. The therapist consultation team
is designed to offer support for the provider in treating the client effectively
by preventing dysfunctional behavior, burn out, or rigidity on the part of the
provider (Linehan, 1993a, 1993b).
Specific Techniques
DBT is essentially a problem-solving treatment balanced by validation and
held together by dialectical strategies. Communication techniques and case
management strategies are also integral parts of DBT. In addition, DBT has
specific protocols for handling crises and egregious behavior (Linehan,
1993a). Specific techniques are derived from each group of strategies, and
therefore we use the terms interchangeably. In DBT, strategies are principles
that guide you in specific situations.
Change Strategies. Strategies for problem solving are drawn from cognitive-
behavioral treatments and include contingency management, skills training,
exposure, cognitive modification, commitment, and behavioral analysis. DBT
adds to typical CBT change strategies: (a) targeting, (b) attention to in-session
behavior, (c) chain analysis, (d) opposite action, and (e) observing limits.
Targeting. The structure of DBT sessions is based on a target hierarchy that
eases decision making while ensuring that the most crucial problems are
addressed. The counselor filters the potential issues to address by categorizing
them according to a hierarchy and starting at the top. The hierarchy is different
in individual therapy, skills training, or phone coaching. In individual therapy,
the target hierarchy is decreasing suicidal behavior and any other imminent
life-threatening behavior (e.g., murder), reducing therapy-interfering behav-
iors, reducing quality-of-life-interfering behaviors, and increasing behavioral
skills (Linehan, 1993a).
Suicide attempts, threats, ideation, self-harming behaviors, and the cli-
ent’s expectations about the value of suicide are directly targeted and never
ignored. To maintain a dialectical stance, the counselor reaches for a syn-
thesis between the beneficial short-term effects of suicidal behavior and

the negative long-term effects. Typically, a synthesis would be to replace

suicidal behaviors with a more adaptive strategy for short-term relief
(Linehan, 1993a).
Reducing therapy-interfering behaviors (TIBs) is aimed at facilitating treat-
ment. TIBs may come from either the client or the therapist and include nonat-
tentive, noncollaborative, and noncompliant behaviors, any behaviors that burn
the therapist out or that create therapeutic imbalance, and behaviors that show
a lack of respect for the client (Linehan, 1993a).
The third set of targets are aimed at reducing complex, pervasive behavioral
patterns, including Axis I disorders, that have a severe effect on the quality of
life of the client. Last, an increase in behavioral skills is needed for an effective
life (Linehan, 1993a).
Attention to in-session behavior. What occurs in-session is considered impor-
tant when it is either a TIB or a target-relevant behavior. Clients will often
emit both problematic behaviors and target behaviors with the counselor pres-
ent. DBT counselors attend to such behaviors as they occur by highlighting
them and drawing connections to out-of-session behavior and by applying con-
tingencies to them (Linehan, 1993a). For example, one of our clients had diffi-
culties with saying no to requests made to her. She would agree to anything
asked of her and then, if she could not do it, she avoided the person and the situ-
ation. This pattern caused many problems in her relationships. When she told
her counselor she could not reschedule one session for an earlier hour because
it would be unlikely she would be able to wake up, the counselor made a point
of highlighting how she said no and how she prevented damaging the relation-
ship, which she could have if she had agreed to it and then did not show up. By
reinforcing an effective way to handle a situation in-session that was typically
ineffectively handled outside of session, the counselor increased the likeli-
hood that the effective behavior would occur more often.
Chain analysis. In a behavioral chain analysis, a specific instance of a behav-
ior is assessed in great detail. The therapist starts by asking the client when the
problem began (the precipitating event) and continues by assessing each link
in the chain of events by getting detailed descriptions of the environment and
client’s behavior, including the consequences (Linehan, 1993a). This moment-
by-moment assessment helps the therapist and client more clearly identify the
causes and contingencies that are maintaining the problematic behavior (for a
full discussion of behavioral chain analysis, including a detailed example, see
Linehan & Dexter-Mazza, 2008, p. 395).
Opposite action. Opposite action is aimed at reducing unwanted negative
emotions. The assumption behind it states that acting in accordance with the
action urge that is associated with an emotion increases the likelihood that that

Neacsiu et al. 13
emotion will fire again (Linehan et al., 2007). This formulation is similar to
current conceptualizations underlying exposure and response prevention in that
it involves actively replacing an emotion-consistent behavior with an emotion-
inconsistent behavior (e.g., Foa, 2000; Himle & Franklin, 2009). The difference
between opposite action and exposure is that opposite action is defined and
adapted for all emotions, not only fear. Therefore, if an emotion does not fit
the facts of the situation or is dysfunctional, opposite action involves (a) expo-
sure to the stimuli or cues evoking the emotion, (b) blocking of the behavior
prompted by the emotion’s action urge, and (c) acting in a way that is opposite
to or inconsistent with the emotional response (Linehan, 1993b).
For example, the action urge of fear is to avoid. The opposite action is to
fully approach the situation. For anger, the action urge is to attack and have
judgments about the situation. The opposite action to anger involves gently
removing oneself from the anger-provoking situation and engaging in activi-
ties that are incompatible with anger, such as unclenching fists and opening
the palms of hands, relaxing shoulders, making understanding or empathic
statements, or actively working to generate caring or understanding for the
person with whom the client is angry. Over time, the very stimuli that initially
elicited anger become conditioned to a lower intensity of anger and potentially
to incompatible emotions (e.g., empathy; Linehan et al., 2007).
Observing limits. Limits in DBT are similar to the concept of boundaries
found in many treatments. Limits may vary from one counselor to another and
across time and context. In more formal terms, observing limits implies apply-
ing problem-solving strategies and contingency management procedures to
client behaviors that threaten to interfere with the counselor’s ability or willing-
ness to provide therapy. Limits are typically identified when they are crossed
(Linehan, 1993a). For example, occasional calls during the night were not cross-
ing a counselor’s limits until one client started calling her every night in the
middle of the night. Very quickly, the nighttime phone behavior was irritating
to the point that the counselor was dreading seeing the client. Therefore, calling
in the middle of the night became crossing the limits for the counselor. In DBT,
an instance such as this requires that the counselor address it in treatment.
Counselors take responsibility for monitoring their own personal limits and for
communicating to their clients which behaviors are tolerable and which are not.
DBT counselors also extend their limits temporarily when needed (Linehan,
1993a). For example, even if it crossed the counselor’s limits to be called in the
middle of the night, in an emergency the call would be taken.
Validation Strategies. In DBT, change strategies are balanced with valida-

tion strategies. Validation requires empathy, but goes beyond it by accurately

recognizing what is well grounded or justifiable and acknowledging and authen-

ticating what is (Dimeff & Linehan, 2001). Through validation the therapist
communicates to the client what responses make sense and are understand-
able within the current context. This does not mean validating something that
is untrue to make the person feel better (Linehan, 1997).
There are six levels of validation. The first four are common techniques
used in most acceptance-based therapies. At Level 1, the therapist listens
and observes what the client is saying and acts interested in the client. At
Level 2, the therapist accurately reflects back to the client her feelings,
thoughts, assumptions, and behaviors.
Level 3 validation emphasizes articulating the unverbalized. Many clients
have been invalidated so often throughout their lives that they doubt the experi-
ences that they are having. When the treatment provider articulates the unver-
balized, he or she communicates that the response the client probably experiences
is indeed valid. For example, for a client coming from a family who punishes
emotional expression, having a provider say “you are probably sad” when the
client is talking about a close friend moving away may authenticate the cli-
ent’s experience. This technique has the effect of assuring the client that his
or her responses are normal, predictable, and justifiable. At Level 4, the pro-
vider validates behavior in terms of its causes. At this level, behavior is
understandable in terms of historical antecedents but may not make sense in
terms of current antecedents (Linehan, 1997; e.g., “It makes sense you’re
ashamed to say no to your partner because in the past people broke up with
you if you said no”).
The last two levels of validation are more particular to DBT and emphasize
a much more profound validation to the person. Level 5 validation recognizes
behavior, thoughts, and emotions that are valid in terms of current circum-
stances. In other words, Level 5 validation normalizes the client’s valid expe-
rience (e.g., “Most people would get angry at a rude clerk”). Level 6 validation
is called radical genuineness. At this level the counselor treats the person as
valid, by recognizing the person as he or she is, seeing capabilities, and under-
standing actual difficulties and incapacities. DBT puts a great value on the
counselor not taking the role of “therapist” but acting like a genuine person
(Dimeff & Linehan, 2001; Linehan, 1997). Linehan makes the same argument
as Carl Rogers (Rogers, 1961), that therapists must be genuine and authentic
such that if an outside observer were to compare the interaction style between
a client and a therapist and the same therapist and a colleague, the observer
would find little difference between the two.

Neacsiu et al. 15
Dialectical Strategies. Dialectical strategies are crucial to the treatment.

They help balance acceptance and change strategies and guide the therapist
to be on the lookout for polarity that may occur. Also, from a dialectics per-
spective, the therapist is always asking for what is left out when searching for
causes. Specific strategies help the treatment provider with this task and are
put into practice using an irreverent communication style.
Extending is a specific strategy where the provider focuses on a different
portion of the client’s communication than what was obviously intended.
Usually, this is helpful when the client says something for the dramatic effect
to induce some change in the therapist (Linehan, 1993a). For example, after
a threat to walk out of the room if the therapist does not stop the chain analy-
sis, the therapist might ask what exactly he or she is to do with the rest of the
session if the client is outside. Alternatively the provider might say, “Oh dear!
I did not realize this is so upsetting to you! Maybe we should talk about find-
ing you another therapist that doesn’t require you to do this after you hurt
yourself.”
Another dialectical strategy, devil’s advocate, is used to strengthen a
client’s view or a client’s commitment. The counselor takes a position that is
opposite to the client’s and argues for it to help the client move toward the
synthesis (Linehan, 1993a; e.g., “So glad to hear you’re committing to not
kill yourself for the next year! Are you sure about that though? It’s going to
be awfully hard. . . .”).
Used to highlight the opposite point or the path to synthesis, metaphors
are used when talking literally about what is happening is too difficult for
the client (Linehan, 1993a). For example, the counselor may describe that
the client’s misery is like being on a bed of burning coals in the middle of
hell. Furthermore, the counselor might explain that a better use of therapy
time is to drag the client out of this hell rather than to pour a bucket of water
over the client’s feet. This may help a client better understand the importance
of problem solving crisis situations rather than simply getting reassurance and
compassion.
Last, the therapist may help the client make “lemonade out of lemons” by
finding how the client could create value in a situation where value is difficult
to find. Therapists must be alert not to sound like they are not taking clients’
problems seriously (Linehan, 1993a). For example, if a client complains about
a terrible fight with a partner, the therapist might say, “It is unfortunate that
it happened again! It must have been hard to go through it. The good news
is, now we can have a specific instance to figure out why you’re unskillful
in fights.”

Communication Strategies. In DBT, communication to the client is bal-

anced between reciprocal and irreverent styles. Irreverence is incongruous
and unexpected and is used when therapy is stuck or the client is rigid.
The function of irreverence is to capture the client’s attention, shift his or
her affective response, and get him or her to see a different point of view.
Irreverence must be surrounded with validation and must be genuine and
nonjudgmental (Linehan, 1993a).
Specific irreverence strategies are reframing, plunging in where angels
fear to tread, using a confrontational tone, calling the client’s bluff, and high-
lighting omnipotence versus impotence (Linehan, 1993a). For example, if the
client threatens suicide, the counselor might respond using reframing, “What
do you mean you want to kill yourself? You promised not to quit therapy!”
which focuses on a different portion of the message than what the client
intended; or plunge where angels fear to tread, “Look, you’re ruining your
chances of having any close relationships with people if you keep threatening
to kill yourself whenever things don’t go your way”; or use a confrontational
tone, “Are you out of your mind????”; or call the client’s bluff (provided the
counselor is certain it is a bluff), “Would you like to end the session now?”;
or highlight impotence of the therapist, “You could kill yourself, the prob-
lem with that would be that I haven’t learned yet how to help dead people.”
Detailed descriptions of these strategies as well as further examples can be
found in the DBT manual (Linehan, 1993a).
Reciprocal communication strategies balance irreverence as well as the
power differential by making the treatment provider more vulnerable in
session. There are five ways in which this purpose is accomplished:
responsiveness, self-involving self-disclosure, personal disclosure, warmth,
and genuineness. Responsiveness is defined by responding to the content of
the client’s concerns: staying awake and taking the client’s agenda seriously.
Self-involving disclosure refers to statements about the provider’s reactions
to the client (e.g., “When you do X, I feel Y”). Personal disclosure refers to
communicating information about yourself, as long as it is in the client’s best
interests. Warmth is communicated by voice tone, posture, and conversation
style; the counselor must remain warm even when the session is difficult.
Last, genuineness asks one to bring oneself and not their therapist self into
session (Linehan, 1993a).
Case Management Strategies. There are three case management strategies:

consultation to the client, environmental intervention, and the consultation
team. Case management is needed to help counselors navigate relationships
with other professionals involved in the client’s case. In DBT, a counselor will

Neacsiu et al. 17
intervene in the client’s environment only under very specific conditions: (a) the
client is unable to do so and the outcome is extremely important, (b) the envi-
ronment demands someone in high power, (c) the client’s life or others are in
imminent danger, (d) it is the humane thing to do and will cause no harm, or
(e) the client is a minor. In all other instances, the counselor typically consults
with the client and coaches him or her on how to interact but does not consult
with other providers on how to interact with the client. In this way, the
client learns how to interact more skillfully with his or her environment
(Linehan, 1993a).
Research Support
Research Supporting Efficacy and
Effectiveness: DBT With BPD
DBT is by far the best studied treatment for BPD. To date, DBT has been
evaluated in both 1-year and 6-month treatment lengths in 10 randomized
controlled trials (RCTs) conducted across six independent research teams. Four
of these trials specifically recruited highly suicidal BPD clients (Linehan,
Armstrong, Suarez, Allmon, & Heard, 1991; Linehan et al., 2006; McMain
et al., 2009; Turner, 2000). Compared to treatment as usual (TAU), DBT par-
ticipants were significantly less likely to attempt suicide or self-injure, had less
medically severe suicidal behavior episodes, had lower treatment dropout,
tended to use psychiatric facilities less, and improved more on scores of global
and social adjustment. Improvements in hopelessness, depression, suicidal
ideation, and reasons for living did not differ between treatments (Linehan
et al., 1991; Linehan, Heard, & Armstrong, 1993).
Compared to client-centered therapy (CCT), DBT reduced suicidal behavior,
depression, anger, use of crisis services, and impulsiveness and improved social
adjustment significantly more than CCT. In the same study, CCT did not out-
perform DBT in any assessment, although there was no significant difference
in anxiety between conditions (Turner, 2000).
Despite promising results, DBT has been criticized for having unclear
mechanisms of change (Scheel, 2000) and for not having sufficient follow-up
data to support its long-term effectiveness (Westen, 2000). The prestige of
the university setting, experience of therapists, provision of supervision, and
extensive training are also presented as potential confounds in studies of DBT
(Scheel, 2000).
To address these confounds, Linehan designed a control condition with equal
training, prestige, experience, and amount of supervision. When compared to

treatment by nonbehavioral community experts, DBT reduced suicide attempts

by half and resulted in less medically severe self-injurious episodes and
in fewer admissions to both emergency departments and inpatient units
because of suicidality. There was equal improvement in suicidal ideation
and depression in both conditions. These gains were maintained through
1 year of follow-up (Linehan et al., 2006).
McMain and colleagues (2009) also compared DBT with brief psychodynamic-
oriented therapy plus medication management for highly suicidal BPD clients.
They found significant reductions following treatment in suicidal behavior, health
care utilization, depression, borderline psychopathology, and anger but no differ-
ence between the two conditions. Treatment gains were also maintained through-
out 1 year of follow-up.
DBT was adapted to also address comorbid substance use disorder (SUD).
Changes included the application of dialectics to issues surrounding abstinence,
an added set of substance abuse behavioral targets, an additional set of attach-
ment strategies for the easy-to-lose clients, and modification of some skills to
more directly address substance abuse problems (Dimeff, Rizvi, Brown, &
Linehan, 2000). Two RCTs and a controlled trial have assessed DBT’s effec-
tiveness with BPD-SUD individuals (Dimeff et al., 2000; Linehan et al.,
1999; Linehan et al., 2002; Van den Bosch et al., 2005).
Linehan and colleagues (1999) compared DBT to TAU for methamphetamine-
dependent suicidal women with BPD. Two times more participants dropped
out of TAU (73%) than DBT. Furthermore, urinalyses suggested a statistically
significant reduction in drug abuse for DBT clients when compared to TAU
clients. Follow-up also indicated significant improvement in social and global
adjustment.
A second RCT (Linehan et al., 2002) compared DBT with Comprehensive
Validation Therapy with 12-Step (CVT_12S) in heroin-addicted BPD women.
All participants were concurrently on LAAM (an opiate agonist). Results of
urinalyses indicated that both treatment conditions were effective in reducing
opiate use relative to baseline. At posttreatment, all participants had a low
proportion of opiate-positive urinalyses and a significant decrease in psycho-
pathology. DBT and CVT_12S were equivalent in their reduction of drug use
throughout the treatment, but DBT was significantly better at maintaining
these gains at follow-up than CVT_12S.
Van den Bosch and colleagues (2005) also showed that DBT outperformed
TAU on retention rates and decreased borderline psychopathology during 1 year
of treatment. DBT and TAU performed comparably during treatment and at
follow-up with regard to decrease in suicidal behavior and substance abuse.

Neacsiu et al. 19
Among less severe BPD patients, DBT reduced suicide ideation, hopeless-
ness, anger expression, and amount of hospitalization to a greater degree than
TAU (Koons et al., 2001), improved treatment retention, self-damaging impul-
sivity, and borderline features (Verheul et al., 2003), and decreased suicidal ide-
ation and urges to self-harm (Stanley, Brodsky, Nelson, & Dulit, 2007). Across
these studies, DBT did not differ from non-DBT control conditions in reduction
of suicidal behavior.
Furthermore, standard DBT increased treatment retention more than DBT
skills combined with psychodynamic individual therapy (Harley, Baity, Blais,
& Jacobo, 2007), although DBT skills only was sufficient to outperform stan-
dard group therapy in improving dropout, depression, anger, and affect insta-
bility (Soler et al., 2009). The addition of olanzapine to DBT may hasten the
reduction of irritability in BPD women (Linehan, McDavid, Brown, Sayrs, &
Gallop, 2008), but the addition of fluoxetine does not appear to add any ben-
efit (Simpson et al., 2004).
DBT can be successfully implemented in community settings, showing
similar results there to those obtained in tightly controlled trials. In an Irish
community setting, inpatient visits, symptom severity, and self-harm were sig-
nificantly improved after 6 months of DBT (Blennerhassett, Bamford, Whelan,
Jamieson, & Wilson O’Raghaillaigh, 2009). Furthermore, a 77% decrease in
hospital days, a 56% decrease in crisis bed days, and an 80% decrease in face-
to-face contact with emergency services were also reported by a community
center implementing DBT (American Psychological Association, 1998).
A 3-month inpatient adaptation has also shown significant decreases from
pre- to posttreatment in depression, anxiety, global stress, and suicidal behav-
ior (Bohus et al., 2000) with up to a 50% decrease in self-harm (Alper &
Peterson, 2001). Inpatient DBT performs the same as TAU in reducing dis-
sociation and anger, while showing significantly steeper improvements in all
other areas (Bohus et al., 2004). A forensic adaptation has also shown prom-
ise for violent BPD men. In one controlled trial, DBT reduced the seriousness
of violent incidents and the hostility and anger self-reports significantly more
than TAU (Evershed et al., 2003).
DBT With Other Populations

In addition to empirical support for the effectiveness of DBT with BPD, the
treatment has been evaluated and shown to be a promising treatment for use
with other populations. Adaptations of DBT were found to be effective treat-
ments for bulimia nervosa (Safer et al., 2001), binge eating disorder (Telch,
Agras, & Linehan, 2001), major depressive disorder with (Lynch et al., 2007)

and without comorbid personality disorders (Harley, Sprich, Safren, Jacobo, &
Fava, 2008; Lynch, Morse, Mendelson, & Robins, 2003), domestic abuse vic-
tims (Iverson et al., 2009), vocation rehabilitation (Koons et al., 2006), stalking
offenders (Rosenfeld et al., 2007), difficult-to-manage correctional populations
(Shelton et al., 2009), and families of suicidal patients (Rajalin et al., 2009).
The majority of the adaptations offered only the skills training component
of DBT. An exception was the study by Rosenfeld and colleagues (2007),
who provided the full DBT package and found that program completers
were significantly less likely to have another stalking offense in the 6-month
follow-up than program noncompleters or population norms. A second excep-
tion is found in two studies presented by Lynch and colleagues (2007). In the
first study, DBT skills and DBT phone coaching were added to antidepres-
sants and compared to antidepressants alone for an elderly, depressed sample.
In the second study, standard DBT with medication was compared to medica-
tion alone for an elderly, depressed sample with comorbid personality disor-
ders. In both studies, the authors found that depressed individuals remitted
much faster when treated with DBT and medication than when treated with
medication alone.
In all the other studies, skills-only adaptations of DBT improved pre- to
posttreatment ratings of depression, hopelessness, and general distress in
victims of domestic abuse (Iverson et al., 2009); depression, hopelessness,
anger, and number of hours worked in vocational rehabilitation clients
(Koons et al., 2006); perceived burden, psychic health, and well-being in
family members of suicidal individuals (Rajalin et al., 2009); and aggres-
sion, impulsivity, and psychopathology in difficult-to-manage correctional
populations (Shelton et al., 2009). When compared to TAU or a wait list
condition, DBT significantly increased abstinence from binging and purg-
ing in females with eating disorders (Safer et al., 2001; Telch et al., 2001)
and decreased depression in treatment-resistant depressed individuals (Harley
et al., 2008).
Issues of Individual or
Cultural Diversity and Social Justice
Culturally sensitive treatments need to be adaptable to the individual and com-
patible with the worldview of clients. DBT is easily adaptable to fit the culture
of the client because it is based on principles (rather than a fixed session com-
position), a collaborative nature, and a flexible structure. Although it is possi-
ble for principles to be culture-bound constructs, the principles on which DBT

Neacsiu et al. 21
has been developed (i.e., learning theory, change, acceptance, mindfulness,

dialectics) are broad and, as such, flexible to the particular needs and style of
both counselor and patient. The treatment does not impose rigid session plans
or curricula; instead, it guides the counselor in how to respond through princi-
ples and strategies. The counselor has freedom to choose what to do in each
session, and adherence to the treatment comes from following the DBT
framework rather than from specific content.
DBT is structured around the client’s goals and aspirations, adding fur-
ther potential for DBT to be applicable across diverse cultures. The targeted
outcome for a DBT client is not to fix his or her problems following a set of
arbitrary criteria. The outcome is to help the client get what he or she wants, or
to get closer to obtaining it. Because of this emphasis on client values and goals,
DBT is easily applicable to all clients regardless of race, ethnicity, or gender.
DBT helps clients achieve their individual goals without imposing social expec-
tations of the dominant culture. In this way, DBT supports social justice.
DBT was developed on primarily Eurocentric samples. Nevertheless, the
transactional interaction between BPD individuals and the environment,
explained in the biosocial theory, could be easily adaptable to other patterns
of interaction more common to different cultures. For example, at least in
theory, the Afrocentric worldview (Myers, 2003) seems compatible with the
way DBT is structured and presented to clients, making it possibly more pal-
atable for African American minorities than standard treatments. First, DBT
is compatible with the holistic nature of the Afrocentric worldview by posit-
ing that reality can be known through sensory and spiritual means. Second,
interpersonal relationships, cooperation, communalism, and harmony with nature
are valued in the Afrocentric worldview, as well as in DBT, giving additional
common ground for the two philosophies to overlap (Martin, 2006). However,
despite these observations, research is needed to assess whether DBT is indeed
compatible with an Afrocentric worldview.
Turner, Barnett, and Korslund (1998) present potential modifications to
make to DBT to use it with minority youth populations. They recommend that
the therapist use dialectical thinking, without teaching it to the clients; use con-
crete language and concrete thinking to teach skills; do individual rather than
group skills training; be more actively involved in the patient’s community
system; and be flexible about the length of treatment. They present case exam-
ples of how adding these modifications to DBT has led to improvements in
minority adolescents.
Only one study examined whether ethnicity and other demographic charac-
teristics predict major outcomes in DBT. Ethnicity, education, age, and

marital status did not predict change in remission, dropout, self-injury, and
suicide attempts following DBT treatment for 96 participants (Harned, Salsman,
Secrist, Comtois, & Linehan, 2006). These findings suggest that DBT outcomes
are similar for minority populations.
Yet overall, evidence bearing on whether DBT needs to be further adapted
for culturally diverse populations is scarce. This is a major limitation of cur-
rent DBT findings and a fruitful area for further research. Although in theory
DBT should be easily applicable to other cultures, issues such as directness of
the therapist, appropriateness of self-disclosure, and value given to personal
goals may need to be addressed in working with clients from less westernized
cultures. Thus far, DBT has been successfully adapted to a prison setting
(e.g., Quinn & Shera, 2009), suggesting that it has potential to be translatable
to populations with different needs.
An important cultural issue to consider with the application of DBT is that
at the core of the treatment are mindfulness and acceptance practices drawn
from a Zen philosophy. Awareness of the present moment and radical accep-
tance are taught to clients as skills, and counselors are required to practice
them. Although this emphasis may be perfect for some clients from non-
Western origins, what happens if counselors or clients have a different world
perspective and are not fluent in Zen practices or Buddhism? Although these
skills were drawn from Zen principles, they are compatible with and can
be translated into and explained through most spiritual practices, or using a
framework that emphasizes theory and research from behavioral sciences. For
example, for a spiritual client, mindfulness practice can be equivalent to prayer
(where one throws oneself into praying), contemplative meditation, or a wide-
awake observation of a church ceremony. Clients and counselors can be past,
present, or future oriented, as long as they are doing this mindfully.
If the client or counselor is not spiritual, mindfulness practice can be
explained through psychological research. For example, mindfulness training
and practice decreases worry (Evans et al., 2008), enhances self-regulation
(K. Brown & Ryan, 2003), increases positive emotions, and strengthens the
body’s immune system (Davidson et al., 2003).
Summary
In summary, DBT is an evidence-based, principle-based treatment that inte-
grates behavioral theory with dialectical philosophy and Zen principles. The
treatment evolved from dissatisfaction with standard CBT for a difficult-to-
treat population. Validation and contemplative practices were added, and a
dialectical philosophy emphasizing the synthesis of opposites was used to

Neacsiu et al. 23
balance change with acceptance. Owing to the difficulty of working with BPD
clients, behavioral change was balanced with acceptance through dialectics
and stylistic strategies, while simultaneously providing a framework for case
management and support for counselors. DBT incorporates four treatment
modes (individual, skills, phone coaching, therapist consultation team) aimed
at addressing the behavioral difficulties of BPD clients primarily by enhancing
client and counselor motivation as well as by increasing the behavioral rep-
ertoire clients need for effectively reaching a life worth living.
Research supports the DBT model and findings on adaptations of DBT sug-
gest that such techniques are helpful with a variety of other patient groups. In
theory, the principles and structure of DBT should be translatable to minority
populations as well. Nevertheless, more research is needed to understand how
DBT applies to such groups and how it supports principles of social justice.
Counseling psychologists work in a variety of applied settings. Although at
first DBT may seem somewhat counter to the underlying philosophy of the
specialty, it is a reality that counseling psychologists are likely to work with
clients who have diagnoses of BPD or features thereof. DBT would bring a
useful set of skills and knowledge in these situations. Furthermore, the general
principles of DBT can be used with any client by simply skipping aspects that
are not particularly relevant to the client’s presentation (e.g., where suicidal
ideation or self-harming behavior is not present). The specific techniques pre-
sented (e.g., chain analysis, validation, skills training) can be helpful with a
diverse group of clients. As research has demonstrated, DBT is helpful in a
wide array of settings for a wide array of populations.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the
research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Dr. Linehan receives DBT
book royalties and payment for training in DBT.
Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publica-
tion of this article.
References
Alper, G., & Peterson, S. J. (2001). Dialectical Behavior Therapy for patients with
borderline personality disorder. Journal of Psychosocial Nursing, 39(10), 38-45.
American Psychological Association. (1998). Gold award: Integrating dialectical
behavioral therapy into a community mental health program. Mental Health Cen-
ter of Greater Manchester, NH. Psychiatric Services, 49, 1338-1340.

Blennerhassett, R., Bamford, L., Whelan, A., Jamieson, S., & Wilson O’Raghaillaigh, J.
(2009). Dialectical behaviour therapy in an Irish community mental health setting.
Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine, 26(2), 59-63.
Bohus, M., Haaf, B., Simms, T., Limberger, M. F., Schmahl, C., Unckel, C., . . .
Linehan, M. M. (2004). Effectiveness of inpatient dialectical behavioral therapy
for borderline personality disorder: A controlled trial. Behaviour Research and
Therapy, 42, 487-499.
Bohus, M., Haaf, B., Stiglmayr, C., Pohl, U., Bohme, R., & Linehan, M. (2000).
Evaluation of inpatient dialectical-behavioral therapy for borderline personality
disorder—A prospective study. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 38, 875-887.
Brown, K., & Ryan, R. (2003). The benefits of being present: Mindfulness and its
role in psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
84, 822-848.
Brown, M., Comtois, K. A., & Linehan, M. M. (2002). Reasons for suicide attempts
and nonsuicidal self-injury in women with borderline personality disorder. Journal
of Abnormal Psychology, 111, 198-202.
Chapman, A. L., Gratz, K. L., & Brown, M. Z. (2006). Solving the puzzle of deliberate
self-harm: The experiential avoidance model. Behaviour Research and Therapy,
44, 371-394.
Comtois, K. A., Elwood, L., Holdcraft, L. C., Simpson, T. L., & Smith, W. R. (2007).
Effectiveness of Dialectical Behavior Therapy in a community mental health center.
Cognitive and Behavioral Practice, 14, 406-414.
Conklin, C. Z., Bradley, R., & Westen, D. (2006). Affect regulation in borderline
personality disorder. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 194, 69-77.
Conklin, C. Z., & Westen, D. (2005). Borderline personality disorder in clinical practice.
American Journal of Psychiatry, 162, 867-875.
Crowell, S. E., Beauchaine, T. P., & Linehan, M. M. (2009). A biosocial developmental
model of borderline personality: Elaborating and extending Linehan’s theory. Psy-
chological Bulletin, 135, 495-510.
Davidson, R., Kabat-Zinn, J., Schumacher, J., Rosenkranz, M., Muller, D., Santorelli, S.,
. . . Sheridan, J. F. (2003). Alterations in brain and immune function produced by
mindfulness meditation. Psychosomatic Medicine, 65, 564-570.
Dimeff, L. A., Comtois, K. A., & Linehan, M. M. (1998). In A. W. Graham & K.
Schultz (Eds.), Principles of addiction medicine (pp. 1063-1079). Arlington,
VA: American Society of Addiction Medicine.
Dimeff, L., & Linehan, M. M. (2001). Dialectical Behavior Therapy in a nutshell.
California Psychologist, 34, 10-13.
Dimeff, L., Rizvi, S. L., Brown, M., & Linehan, M. M. (2000). Dialectical Behavior
Therapy for substance abuse: A pilot application to methamphetamine-dependent
women with borderline personality disorder. Cognitive and Behavioral Practice,
7, 457-468.

Neacsiu et al. 25
Dougherty, D. M., Bjork, J. M., Huckabee, C. G., Moeller, F. G., & Swann, A. C. (1999).
Laboratory measures of aggression and impulsivity in women with borderline per-
sonality disorder. Psychiatry Research, 85, 315-326.
Ebner-Priemer, U. W., Badeck, S., Beckmann, C., Wagner, A., Feige, B., Weiss, I., . . .
Bohus, M. (2005). Affective dysregulation and dissociative experience in female
patients with borderline personality disorder: A startle response study. Journal of
Psychiatric Research, 39, 85-92.
Ebner-Priemer, U. W., Kuo, J., Welch, S. S., Thielgen, T., Witte, S., Bohus, M.,
& Linehan, M. M. (2006). A valence-dependent group-specific recall bias
of retrospective self-reports. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 194,
774-779.
Evans, S., Ferrando, S., Findler, M., Stowell, C., Smart, C., & Haglin, D. (2008).
Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for generalized anxiety disorder. Journal of
Anxiety Disorders, 22, 716-721.
Evershed, S., Tennant, A., Boomer, D., Rees, A., Barkham, M., & Watson, A.
(2003). Practice-based outcomes of Dialectical Behaviour Therapy (DBT)
targeting anger and violence, with male forensic patients: A pragmatic and
non-contemporaneous comparison. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health,
13, 198-213.
Foa, E. B. (2000). Psychosocial treatment of posttraumatic stress disorder. Journal of
Clinical Psychiatry, 61, 43-48.
Fruzzetti, A. E., Shenk, C., & Hoffman, P. D. (2005). Family interaction and the
development of borderline personality disorder: A transactional model. Develop-
mental Psychopathology, 17, 1007-1030.
Gratz, K. L., Rosenthal, M. Z., Tull, M. T., Lejuez, C. W., & Gunderson, J. G. (2006).
An experimental investigation of emotion dysregulation in borderline personality
disorder. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 115, 850-855.
Harley, R. M., Baity, M. R., Blais, M. A., & Jacobo, M. C. (2007). Use of Dialectical
Behavior Therapy skills training for borderline personality disorder in a naturalis-
tic setting. Psychotherapy Research, 17, 362-370.
Harley, R., Sprich, S., Safren, S., Jacobo, M., & Fava, M. (2008). Adaptation of Dia-
lectical Behavior Therapy skills training group for treatment-resistant depression.
Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 196, 136-143.
Harned, M. S., Salsman, N. L., Secrist, C. D., Comtois, K. A., & Linehan, M. M.
(2006, November). Historical factors as predictors of DBT treatment response. In
T. R. Lynch (Chair), Client predictors of treatment response in Dialectical Behav-
ior Therapy across multiple randomized controlled trials. Symposium conducted
at the 40th annual convention of the Association for Behavioral and Cognitive
Therapies, Chicago, IL.

Himle, M., & Franklin, M. (2009). The more you do it, the easier it gets: Exposure
and response prevention for OCD. Cognitive and Behavioral Practice, 161,
29-39.
Hooley, J. M., & Hoffman, P. D. (1999). Expressed emotion and clinical out-
come in borderline personality disorder. American Journal of Psychiatry,
56, 1557-1562.
Iverson, K. M., Shenk, C., & Fruzzetti, A. E. (2009). Dialectical Behavior Therapy
for women victims of domestic abuse: A pilot study. Professional Psychology-
Research and Practice, 40, 242-248.
Koerner, K., & Linehan, M. M. (1992). Integrative therapy for borderline personality
disorder: dialectical behaviour therapy. In J. C. Norcross (Ed.), Handbook of psy-
chotherapy integration (pp. 433-459). New York, NY: Basic Books.
Koerner, K., & Linehan, M. M. (1997). Case formulation in Dialectical Behavior
Therapy for borderline personality disorder. In T. Eells (Ed.), Handbook of psy-
chotherapy case formulation (pp. 340-367). New York, NY: Guilford.
Koons, C. R., Chapman, A. L., Betts, B. B., O’Rourke, B., Morse, N., & Robins, C. J.
(2006). DBT adapted for the vocational rehabilitation of significantly disabled
mentally ill adults. Cognitive and Behavioral Practice, 13, 146-156.
Koons, C. R., Robins, C. J., Tweed, J. L., Lynch, T. R., Gonzalez, A. M., Morse, J. Q.,
. . . Bastian, L. A. (2001). Efficacy of Dialectical Behavior Therapy in women
veterans with borderline personality disorder. Behavior Therapy, 32, 371-390.
Kring, A. M., & Werner, K. H. (2004). Emotion regulation and psychopathology. In
P. Philippot & R. S. Feldman (Eds.), The regulation of emotion (pp. 359-385).
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Levine, D., Marziali, E., & Hood, J. (1997). Emotion processing in borderline person-
ality disorders. Chicago Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 185, 240-246.
Linehan, M. M. (1987). Dialectical behavioral therapy in groups: treating borderline
personality disorders and suicidal behavior. In C. M. Brody (Ed.), Women’s therapy
groups: Paradigms of feminist treatment (pp. 145-162). New York, NY: Springer.
Linehan, M. M. (1989). Cognitive and behavior therapy for borderline personality
disorder. In A. Tasman, R. E. Hales, & A. J. Frances (Eds.), Review of psychiatry
(Vol. 8, pp. 84-102). Washington D.C.: American Psychiatric Press
Linehan, M. M. (1993a). Cognitive-behavioral treatment of borderline personality
disorder. New York, NY: Guilford.
Linehan, M. M. (1993b). Skills training manual for treating borderline personality
disorder. New York, NY: Guilford.
Linehan, M. M. (1997). Validation and psychotherapy. In A. Bohart & L. Greenberg
(Eds.), Empathy reconsidered: New directions in psychotherapy (pp. 353-392).
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Neacsiu et al. 27
Linehan, M. M., Armstrong, H. E., Suarez, A., Allmon, D., & Heard, H. L. (1991).
Cognitive-behavioral treatment of chronically parasuicidal borderline patients.
Archives of General Psychiatry, 48, 1060-1064.
Linehan, M. M., Bohus, M., & Lynch, T. (2007). Dialectical Behavior Therapy for
pervasive emotion dysregulation: Theoretical and practical underpinnings. In
J. Gross (Ed.), Handbook of emotion regulation (pp.581-605). New York, NY:
Guilford.
Linehan, M. M., Comtois, K. A., Murray, A. M., Brown, M. Z., Gallop, R. J.,
Heard, H. L., . . . Lindenboim, N. (2006). Two-year randomized controlled trial
and follow-up of Dialectical Behavior Therapy vs. therapy by experts for suicidal
behaviors and borderline personality disorder. Archives of General Psychiatry,
63, 757-766.
Linehan, M. M., & Dexter-Mazza, E. (2008). Dialectical Behavior Therapy for bor-
derline personality disorder. In D. H. Barlow (Ed.), Clinical handbook of psycho-
logical disorders (pp. 365-420). New York, NY: Guilford.
Linehan, M. M., Dimeff, L. A., Reynolds, S. K., Comtois, K. A., Welch, S. S.,
Heagerty, P., & Kivlahan, D. R. (2002). Dialectical Behavior Therapy versus
Comprehensive Validation Therapy plus 12-step for the treatment of opioid
dependent women meeting criteria for borderline personality disorder. Drug and
Alcohol Dependence, 67, 13-26.
Linehan, M. M., Heard, H. L., & Armstrong, H. E. (1993). Naturalistic follow-up of a
behavioral treatment for chronically parasuicidal borderline patients. Archives of
General Psychiatry, 50, 971-974.
Linehan, M. M., McDavid, J. D., Brown, M. Z., Sayrs, J. H. R., & Gallop, R. J. (2008).
Olanzapine plus Dialectical Behavior Therapy for women with high irritability
who meet criteria for borderline personality disorder: A double-blind, placebo-
controlled study. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 69, 999-1005.
Linehan, M. M., Schmidt, H., III, Dimeff, L. A., Craft, J. C., Kanter, J., & Comtois, K. A.
(1999). Dialectical Behavior Therapy for patients with borderline personality disor-
der and drug-dependence. American Journal on Addictions, 8, 279-292.
Livesley, J. W., Jang, K. L., & Vernon, P. A. (1998). Phenotypic and genetic structure of
traits delineating personality disorder. Archives of General Psychiatry, 55, 941-948.
Lynch, T. R., Cheavens, J. S., Cukrowicz, K. C., Thorp, S. R., Bronner, L., & Beyer, J.
(2007). Treatment of older adults with co-morbid personality disorder and depres-
sion: A Dialectical Behavior Therapy approach. International Journal of Geriat-
ric Psychiatry, 22, 131-143.
Lynch, T. R., Morse, J. Q., Mendelson, T., & Robins, C. J. (2003). Dialectical Behavior
Therapy for depressed older adults: A randomized pilot study. American Journal of
Geriatric Psychiatry, 11, 33-45.

Martin, B. (2006). Could Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT) form the basis for a
truly multicultural therapy? Introduction to Dialectical Behavior Therapy. One-
day workshop, University of Washington, Seattle.
McMain, S., Korman, L. M., & Dimeff, L. A. (2001). Dialectical Behavior Therapy and
the treatment of emotion dysregulation. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 57, 183-196.
McMain, S. F., Links, P. S., Gnam, W. H., Guimond, T., Cardish, R. J., Korman, L.,
. . . Streiner, D. L. (2009). A randomized trial of Dialectical Behavior Therapy ver-
sus general psychiatric management for borderline personality disorder. American
Journal of Psychiatry, 166, 1365-1374.
Miller, A. L., Rathus, J. H., & Linehan, M. M. (2007). Dialectical Behavior Therapy
with suicidal adolescents. New York, NY: Guilford.
Myers, L. J. (2003). Understanding an Afrocentric world view: Introduction to an
optimal psychology (2nd ed.). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.
Nelson-Gray, R. O., Keane, S. P., Hurst, R. M., Mitchell, J. T., Warburton, J. B.,
Chok, J. T., & Cobb, A. R. (2006). A modified DBT skills training program for
oppositional defiant adolescents: Promising preliminary findings. Behaviour
Research and Therapy, 44, 1811-1820.
Putnam, K. M., & Silk, K. R. (2005). Emotion dysregulation and the development of
borderline personality disorder. Development and Psychopathology, 17, 899-925.
Quinn, A., & Shera, W. (2009). Evidence-based practice in group work with incarcerated
youth. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 325, 288-293.
Rajalin, M., Wickholm-Pethrus, L., Hursti, T., & Jokinen, J. (2009). Dialectical
Behavior Therapy-based skills training for family members of suicide attempters.
Archives of Suicide Research, 13, 257-263.
Rathus, J. H., & Miller, A. L. (2002). Dialectical Behavior Therapy adapted for sui-
cidal adolescents. Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior, 32, 146-157.
Robins, C. J., Schmidt, H., & Linehan, M. M. (2004). Dialectical Behavior Therapy:
Synthesizing radical acceptance with skillful means. In S. C. Hayes, V. M. Follette,
& M. M. Linehan (Eds.), Mindfulness and acceptance: Expanding the cognitive-
behavioral tradition (pp. 30-44). New York, NY: Guilford.
Rogers, C. R. (1961). On becoming a person. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Rosenfeld, B., Galietta, M., Ivanoff, A., Garcia-Mansilla, A., Martinez, R., Fava, J.,
. . . Green, D. (2007). Dialectical Behavior Therapy for the treatment of stalking
offenders. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 6, 95-103.
Rosenthal, M. Z., Gratz, K. L., Kosson, D. S., Cheavens, J. S., Lejuez, C. W., &
Lynch, T. R. (2008). Borderline personality disorder and emotional responding: A
review of the research literature. Clinical Psychology Review, 28, 75-91.
Safer, D. L., Telch, C. F., & Agras, W. S. (2001). Dialectical Behavior Therapy for
bulimia nervosa. American Journal of Psychiatry, 158, 632-634.

Neacsiu et al. 29
Scheel, K. R. (2000). The empirical basis of Dialectical Behavior Therapy: Summary,

critique, and implications. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 7, 68-86.
Schotte, D. E., & Clum, G. A. (1987). Problem-solving skills in suicidal psychiatric
patients. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 55, 49-54.
Selby, E. A., & Joiner, T. E. (2009). Cascades of emotion: The emergence of border-
line personality disorder from emotional and behavioral dysregulation. Review of
General Psychology, 133, 219-229.
Shelton, D., Sampl, S., Kesten, K. L., Zhang, W. L., & Trestman, R. L. (2009). Treat-
ment of impulsive aggression in correctional settings. Behavioral Sciences & the
Law, 27, 787-800.
Shneidman, E. (1985). Definition of suicide. New York, NY: John Wiley.
Simpson, E. B., Yen, S., Costello, E., Rosen, K., Begin, A., Pistorello, J., & Pearlstein, T.
(2004). Combined Dialectical Behavior Therapy and fluoxetine in the treatment
of borderline personality disorder. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 65, 379-385.
Skodol, A. E., Gunderson, J. G., Pfohl, B., Widiger, T. A., Livesley, W. J., & Siever, L. J.
(2002). The borderline diagnosis I: Psychopathology, comorbidity, and personal-
ity structure. Biological Psychiatry, 51, 936-950.
Soler, J., Pascual, J. C., Tiana, T., Cebria, A., Barrachina, J., Campins, M. J., . . .
Perez, V. (2009). Dialectical behaviour therapy skills training compared to stan-
dard group therapy in borderline personality disorder: A 3-month randomised
controlled clinical trial. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 47, 353-358.
Stanley, B., Brodsky, B., Nelson, J. D., & Dulit, R. (2007). Brief Dialectical Behavior
Therapy (DBT-B) for suicidal behavior and non-suicidal self injury. Archives of
Suicide Research, 11, 337-341.
Stein, K. F. (1996). Affect instability in adults with a borderline personality disorder.
Archives of Psychiatric Nursing, 10, 32-40.
Telch, C. F., Agras, W. S., & Linehan, M. M. (2001). Dialectical Behavior Therapy
for binge eating disorder: A promising new treatment. Journal of Consulting and
Clinical Psychology, 69, 1061-1065.
Turner, R. M. (2000). Naturalistic evaluation of Dialectical Behavior Therapy-
oriented treatment for borderline personality disorder. Cognitive and Behavioral
Practice, 7, 413-419.
Turner, R. M., Barnett, B. E., & Korslund, K. E. (1998). The application of Dialectical
Behavior Therapy to adolescent borderline clients. In Session: Psychotherapy in
Practice, 4(2), 45-66.
Van den Bosch, L. M. C., Louisa, M., Koeter, M., Stijnen, T., Verheul, R., & Van
den Brink, W. (2005). Sustained efficacy of Dialectical Behaviour Therapy
for borderline personality disorder. Behavior Research and Therapy, 439,
1231-1241.

Verheul, R., Van den Bosch, L. M. C., Koeter, M. W. J., de Ridder, M. A. J., Stijnen, T., &
Van den Brink, W. (2003). Dialectical behaviour therapy for women with border-
line personality disorder: 12-month, randomized clinical trial in the Netherlands.
British Journal of Psychiatry, 182, 135-140.
Wagner, A. W., & Linehan, M. M. (1999). Facial expression recognition ability among
women with borderline personality disorder: Implications for emotion regulation?
Journal of Personality Disorders, 13, 329-344.
Westen, D. (2000). The efficacy of Dialectical Behavior Therapy for borderline per-
sonality disorder. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 71, 92-94.
Yen, S., Zlotnick, C., & Costello, E. (2002). Affect regulation in women with bor-
derline personality disorder traits. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 190,
693-696.
Bios
Andrada D. Neacsiu, MS, is a graduate student in clinical psychology at the
University of Washington. Her research interests include identifying and evaluating
mechanisms of change within effective treatments especially in the context of emo-
tion dysregulation.
Erin F. Ward-Ciesielski, MS, is a clinical graduate student at the University of

Washington. Her research interests include treatment development and evaluation,
specifically for treatments targeting suicidal behaviors.
Marsha M. Linehan, PhD, is a Professor of Psychology at the University of

Washington and the Director of the Behavioral Research and Therapy Clinics. Her
primary research is in the application of behavioral models to suicidal behaviors, drug
dependence, and borderline personality disorder. She is also working on effective
models for treatment dissemination and community training in evidence based treat-
ments. She has developed and extensively tested Dialectical Behavior Therapy
(DBT) and authored two treatment manuals: Cognitive-Behavioral Treatment for
Borderline Personality Disorder and Skills Training Manual for Treating Borderline
Personality Disorder.
View publication stats

Emerging Approaches To Counseling Intervention Dialectical Behavior Therapy

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Emerging Approaches To Counseling Intervention Dialectical Behavior Therapy

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Emerging Approaches to Counseling Intervention

Article in The Counseling Psychologist · October 2012

Andrada Neacsiu Erin F. Ward-Ciesielski

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Emerging Approaches to Counseling Intervention: Dialectical

The online version of this article can be found at:

Division of Counseling Psychology of the American Psychological Association

Email Alerts: http://tcp.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

>> Proof - Jan 4, 2012

Reprints and permission:

The Counseling Psychologist

Emerging Approaches XX(X) 1­-30

Andrada D. Neacsiu,1 Erin F. Ward-Ciesielski,1

Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT) is a comprehensive cognitive behavioral

Downloaded from tcp.sagepub.com at UNIV WASHINGTON LIBRARIES on January 6, 2012

individuals, and it emerged when standard cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT)

Philosophy and Assumptions

Downloaded from tcp.sagepub.com at UNIV WASHINGTON LIBRARIES on January 6, 2012

encouraged to let go of attachments to what they think reality should be like

Downloaded from tcp.sagepub.com at UNIV WASHINGTON LIBRARIES on January 6, 2012

I agree your life is not where you want it to be [acceptance]. So we

Downloaded from tcp.sagepub.com at UNIV WASHINGTON LIBRARIES on January 6, 2012

Table 1. Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT) Assumptions

Assumptions about clients

In addition to the overarching assumptions derived from the philosophy of

Downloaded from tcp.sagepub.com at UNIV WASHINGTON LIBRARIES on January 6, 2012

Major Theoretical Constructs

Downloaded from tcp.sagepub.com at UNIV WASHINGTON LIBRARIES on January 6, 2012

Downloaded from tcp.sagepub.com at UNIV WASHINGTON LIBRARIES on January 6, 2012

Case Formulation in DBT for BPD

Downloaded from tcp.sagepub.com at UNIV WASHINGTON LIBRARIES on January 6, 2012

and forward through different stages throughout treatment (Koerner &

Downloaded from tcp.sagepub.com at UNIV WASHINGTON LIBRARIES on January 6, 2012

essential functions: (a) expanding the individual’s repertoire of skilled behav-

Downloaded from tcp.sagepub.com at UNIV WASHINGTON LIBRARIES on January 6, 2012

and participating spontaneously and completely. “How” skills explain how to

Downloaded from tcp.sagepub.com at UNIV WASHINGTON LIBRARIES on January 6, 2012

the negative long-term effects. Typically, a synthesis would be to replace

Downloaded from tcp.sagepub.com at UNIV WASHINGTON LIBRARIES on January 6, 2012

Validation Strategies. In DBT, change strategies are balanced with valida-

Downloaded from tcp.sagepub.com at UNIV WASHINGTON LIBRARIES on January 6, 2012

recognizing what is well grounded or justifiable and acknowledging and authen-

Downloaded from tcp.sagepub.com at UNIV WASHINGTON LIBRARIES on January 6, 2012

Dialectical Strategies. Dialectical strategies are crucial to the treatment.

Downloaded from tcp.sagepub.com at UNIV WASHINGTON LIBRARIES on January 6, 2012

Communication Strategies. In DBT, communication to the client is bal-

Case Management Strategies. There are three case management strategies:

Downloaded from tcp.sagepub.com at UNIV WASHINGTON LIBRARIES on January 6, 2012

Downloaded from tcp.sagepub.com at UNIV WASHINGTON LIBRARIES on January 6, 2012

treatment by nonbehavioral community experts, DBT reduced suicide attempts

Downloaded from tcp.sagepub.com at UNIV WASHINGTON LIBRARIES on January 6, 2012

DBT With Other Populations

Downloaded from tcp.sagepub.com at UNIV WASHINGTON LIBRARIES on January 6, 2012

Downloaded from tcp.sagepub.com at UNIV WASHINGTON LIBRARIES on January 6, 2012

has been developed (i.e., learning theory, change, acceptance, mindfulness,

Downloaded from tcp.sagepub.com at UNIV WASHINGTON LIBRARIES on January 6, 2012

Downloaded from tcp.sagepub.com at UNIV WASHINGTON LIBRARIES on January 6, 2012

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Downloaded from tcp.sagepub.com at UNIV WASHINGTON LIBRARIES on January 6, 2012

Downloaded from tcp.sagepub.com at UNIV WASHINGTON LIBRARIES on January 6, 2012

Downloaded from tcp.sagepub.com at UNIV WASHINGTON LIBRARIES on January 6, 2012

Emerging Approaches XX(X) 1-30