The Perceived Credibility of Two Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy Rationales for the Treatment of Academic Procrastination

Original Article


The present study examined the perceived credibility of two versions of Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT), specific and general, in the treatment of academic procrastination. A total of 96 university students rated treatment plans for their potential effectiveness which also included manipulations of two further variables: (1) the expertness level of the prospective counselor (expert vs. non-expert) and (2) whether the treatment was presented as an empirically supported treatment (EST) or non-empirically supported treatment (non-EST). The findings revealed a significant interaction between counselor expertness and EST status for the specific REBT rationale, but not for the general REBT rationale. As expected, participants’ credibility ratings of the specific REBT rationale were higher when a prospective counselor was described as expert as opposed to non-expert. However, this was only for the non-EST description. Contrary to predictions, when the specific REBT rationale was presented as an EST, treatment credibility was lower when counselor expertness was high compared to low. The findings have implications for clinical practice in respect to what information should be provided in treatment rationales and warrant further investigations into how specific REBT treatment is perceived.


Specific REBT General REBT Treatment credibility Counselor expertness Empirically supported treatment Academic procrastination 


  1. Addis, M. E., & Carpenter, K. M. (1999). Why, why, why? Reason-giving and Rumination as predictors of response to activation and insight-oriented treatment rationales. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 55, 881–894.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Addis, M. E., & Jacobson, N. S. (2000). A closer look at the treatment rationale and homework compliance in cognitive-behavioral therapy for depression. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 24, 313–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Angle, S. S., & Goodyear, R. K. (1984). Perceptions of counselor qualities: Impact of subjects’ self-concepts, counselor gender, and counselor introductions. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 31, 576–579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barak, A., & LaCrosse, M. B. (1975). Multidimensional perception of counselor behavior. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 22, 471–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bernstein, B. L., & Figiolo, S. W. (1983). Gender and credibility introduction effects on perceived counselor characteristics. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 30, 506–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bohner, G., Ruder, M., & Erb, H. P. (2002). When expertise backfires: Contrast and assimilation effects in persuasion. British Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 495–519.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Borkovec, T. D., & Castonguay, L. G. (1998). What is the scientific meaning of empirically supported therapy? Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 66, 136–142.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Borkovec, T. D., & Nau, S. D. (1972). Credibility of analogue therapy rationales. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 3, 257–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Burns, D. D. (1980). Feeling good: The new mood therapy. New York: William Morrow & Co.Google Scholar
  10. Chambless, D. L., & Hollon, S. D. (1998). Defining empirically supported therapies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 66, 7–18.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chambless, D. L., & Ollendick, T. H. (2001). Empirically supported psychological interventions: Controversies and evidence. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 685–716.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Corrigan, J. D., Dell, D. M., Lewis, K. N., & Schmidt, L. D. (1980). Counseling as a social influence process: A review. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 27, 395–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Devilly, G. J., & Borkovec, T. D. (2000). Psychometric properties of the credibility/expectancy questionnaire. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 31, 73–86.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dryden, W., Dancey, C., & Goldsmith, P. (1990). The status of expectancy-arousal theory: Comparative credibility of systematic desensitization and rational-emotive therapy in the treatment for anxiety about study. Psychological Reports, 66, 803–809.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Dryden, W., David, D., & Ellis, A. (2009). Rational emotive behavior therapy. In K. S. Dobson (Ed.), Handbook of cognitive-behavioral therapies (3rd ed., pp. 226–276). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  16. Dryden, W., Hurton, N., Malki, D., Manias, P., & Williams, K. (2008). Patients’ initial doubts, reservations and objections to the ABC’s of REBT and their application. Journal of Rational-Emotive & Cognitive-Behavior Therapy, 26, 63–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ellis, A. (1980). Rational-emotive therapy and cognitive behavior therapy: Similarities and differences. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 4, 325–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ellis, A., & Knaus, W. J. (1977). Overcoming procrastination. New York: Institute for Rational Living.Google Scholar
  19. Fox, S. G., & Wollersheim, J. P. (1984). Effect of treatment rationale and problem severity upon therapeutic preferences. Psychological Reports, 55, 207–214.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Goates-Jones, M., & Hill, C. E. (2008). Treatment preference, treatment-preference match, and psychotherapist credibility: Influence on session outcome and preference shift. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 45, 61–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hardy, G. E., Barkham, M., Shapiro, D. A., Reynolds, S., Rees, A., & Stiles, W. B. (1995). Credibility and outcome of cognitive-behavioral and psychodynamic-interpersonal psychotherapy. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 34, 555–569.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Heppner, P. P., & Claiborn, C. D. (1989). Social influence research in counseling: A review and critique. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 36, 365–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Heppner, P. P., Wampold, B. E., & Kivlighan, D. M. (2008). Research design in counseling. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.Google Scholar
  24. Howell, D. C. (2007). Statistical methods for psychology (6th ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  25. Hoyt, W. T. (1995). Antecedents and effects of perceived therapist credibility: A meta-analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 43, 430–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kazdin, A. E., & Krouse, R. (1983). The impact of variations in treatment rationales on expectancies for therapeutic change. Behavior Therapy, 14, 657–671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kazdin, A. E., & Wilcoxon, L. A. (1976). Systematic desensitization and nonspecific treatment effects: A methodological evaluation. Psychological Bulletin, 83, 729–758.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. LaCrosse, M., & Barak, A. (1976). Differential perception of counselor behavior. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 23, 170–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lichtenberg, J. W. (1997). Expertise in counseling psychology: A concept in search of support. Educational Psychology Review, 9, 221–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Maddux, J. E., & Rogers, R. W. (1980). Effects of source expertness, physical attractiveness, and supporting arguments on persuasion: A case of brains over beauty. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 235–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Merluzzi, T. V., Banikiotes, P. G., & Missbach, J. W. (1978). Perceptions of counselor characteristics: Contributions of counselor sex, experience, and disclosure level. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 25, 479–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Morrison, L. A., & Shapiro, D. A. (1987). Expectancy and outcome in Prescriptive vs. Exploratory psychotherapy. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 26, 59–60.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  34. Osarchuk, M., & Goldfried, M. R. (1975). A further examination of the credibility of therapy rationales. Behavior Therapy, 6, 694–695.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Pornpitakpan, C. (2004). The persuasiveness of source credibility: A critical review of five decades’ evidence. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34, 243–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rokke, P. D., Carter, A. S., Rehm, L. P., & Veltum, L. G. (1990). Comparative credibility of current treatments for depression. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 27, 235–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Roth, A., & Fonagy, P. (2005). What works for whom? A critical review of psychotherapy research. London: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  38. Schmidt, L. D., & Strong, S. R. (1970). “Expert” and “inexpert” counselors. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 17, 115–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Shapiro, D. A. (1981). Comparative credibility of treatment rationales: Three tests of expectancy theory. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 20, 111–122.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Strong, S. R. (1968). Counseling: An interpersonal influence process. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 15, 215–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Strong, S. R., & Dixon, D. N. (1971). Expertness, attractiveness, and influence in counseling. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 18, 562–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Strong, S. R., & Schmidt, L. D. (1970). Expertness and influence in counseling. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 17, 81–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Tormala, Z. L., Briñol, P., & Petty, R. E. (2006). When credibility attacks: The impact of source credibility on persuasion. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 684–691.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. UCLA: Academic Technology Services, Statistical Consulting Group (2009). Statistical Computing. Retrieved 26 September 2009 from
  45. Wiggins, J. S. (1973). Personality and prediction: Principles of personality assessment. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  46. Wollersheim, J. P., McFall, M. E., Hamilton, S. B., Hickey, C. S., & Bordewick, M. C. (1980). Effects of treatment rationale and problem severity on perceptions of psychological problems and counseling approaches. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 27, 225–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wong, E. C., Kim, B. S. K., Zane, N. W. S., Kim, I. J., & Huang, J. S. (2003). Examining culturally based variables associated with ethnicity: Influences on credibility perceptions of empirically supported interventions. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 9, 88–96.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Professional and Community Education (PACE), GoldsmithsUniversity of LondonLondonUK
  2. 2.Department of Psychology, GoldsmithsUniversity of LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations