Hostname: page-component-7d8f8d645b-p72pn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2023-05-30T01:22:39.597Z Has data issue: false Feature Flags: { "useRatesEcommerce": true } hasContentIssue false

OPTIMAL AND NORMAL AFFECT BALANCE IN PSYCHOTHERAPY OF MAJOR DEPRESSION: EVALUATION OF THE BALANCED STATES OF MIND MODEL

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 October 2002

Robert M. Schwartz
Affiliation:
University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, USA
Charles F. Reynolds III
Affiliation:
University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, USA
Michael E. Thase
Affiliation:
University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, USA
Ellen Frank
Affiliation:
University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, USA
Amy L. Fasiczka
Affiliation:
University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, USA
David A. F. Haaga
Affiliation:
American University, Washington, DC, USA

Abstract

The reformulated balanced states of mind (BSOM) model (Schwartz, 1997) proposed new cognitive-affective set-point ratios based on a mathematical model of consciousness (Lefebvre, 1990) to differentiate among pathological, normal and optimal balances. Using data derived from the Affects Balance Scale (Derogatis, 1975), the reformulated set-points were empirically evaluated by tracking changes in affect balance SOM (ratio of positive to total affect) in 66 depressed male outpatients undergoing cognitive-behavior therapy (n = 45) or pharmacotherapy (n = 21). Confidence interval estimations indicated that across treatments both remitted (SOM = .35) and unremitted (SOM = .35) patients had pathological pretreatment affect balances near the predicted set-point (.38). At post-treatment, affect balance for remitted patients (SOM = .74) progressed to a normal dialogue near the predicted set-point (.72), whereas unremitted patients maintained a negative balance (SOM = .41). Using Hamilton and Global Assessment Scale ratings, remitted patients were classified into average and optimal responders. At post-treatment, average responders achieved an affect balance (SOM = .70) near the normal dialogue set-point (.72), whereas optimal responders progressed to an affect balance (SOM = .81) at the optimal dialogue set-point (.81), supporting the theoretical distinction between normal and optimal balance. A mathematically generated measure that distinguishes normality and optimality permits increased quantitative precision in comparative psychotherapy outcome research.

Type
Main Section
Copyright
© 2002 British Association for Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapies

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.