Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-5g6vh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T13:47:32.669Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Perceptual Control Theory as an integrative framework and Method of Levels as a cognitive therapy: what are the pros and cons?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 December 2008

Warren Mansell
Warren Mansell*
Affiliation:
School of Psychological Sciences, University of Manchester, UK
*
*Address for correspondence: Dr W. Mansell, Senior Lecturer in Psychology, School of Psychological Sciences, Coupland I, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PL, UK (email: warren.mansell@manchester.ac.uk).
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article considers the pros and cons of using Method of Levels (MOL), a therapy based on Perceptual Control Theory (PCT). Five concerns about PCT are that it is an early theory, is not well known, originates from outside psychology, implies that established theories are inaccurate and has a mechanistic approach. Five positive features are that it explains how ‘control’ works, takes a phenomenological perspective, is grounded in biology, integrates many disciplines and has an evidence base. Five features of MOL can raise caution: it is not well known, emphasizes intrinsic change, requires the therapist to let go of control, concentrate intensively and use alternative evaluations of outcome. There are major advantages: it is a simple process to learn; theory-practice links are clear, it is ‘ultra cognitive therapy’ – focused on the present moment, client-centred and enables shifting in perspective, promotes service empowerment, and has an evidence base. This article will help therapists make an informed choice about using MOL.

Keywords

Cognitioncognitive therapycommon factorscontrol
Type
Practice article
Information
the Cognitive Behaviour Therapist , Volume 2 , Issue 3 , September 2009 , pp. 178 - 196
Copyright
Copyright © British Association for Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapies 2008

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.)

References

Recommended follow-up reading

Carey, TA (2008). Hold that Thought! Two Steps to Effective Counseling and Psychotherapy with the Method of Levels. Chapel Hill, NC: Newview Publications.Google Scholar
Higginson, S, Mansell, W (2008). What is the mechanism of psychological change? A qualitative analysis of six individuals who experienced personal change and recovery following a significant life difficulty. Psychology and Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice 81, 309–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansell, W (2005). Control theory and psychopathology. An integrative approach. Psychology and Psychotherapy: Theory Research and Practice 78, 141–178.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Powers, WT (1998). Making Sense of Behavior. New Canaan, CT: Benchmark Publications.Google Scholar

References

Beck, AT (1976). Cognitive Therapy and the Emotional Disorders. New York, NY: Penguin.Google Scholar
Blackburn, I, James, IA, Milne, L, Baker, C, Standart, S, Garland, A, Reichelt, FK (2001). The Revised Cognitive Therapy Scales (CTS-R): Psychometric Properties. Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy 29, 431–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bourbon, WT (1996). On the accuracy and reliability of predictions by Perceptual Control Theory: five years later. Psychological Record 46, 39–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowlby, J (1969). Attachment. London: Hogarth.Google Scholar
Carey, T (2005). Can patients specify treatment parameters? A preliminary investigation. Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy 25, 326–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carey, TA (2006). Method of Levels: How to Do Psychotherapy without Getting in the Way. Living Control Systems Publishing.Google Scholar
Carey, TA (2008). Perceptual control theory and the method of levels: further contributions to a transdiagnostic perspective. International Journal of Cognitive Therapy 1, 237–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carey, TA, Carey, M, Stalker, K, Mullan, RJ, Murray, LK, Spratt, MB (2007). Psychological change from the inside looking out: a qualitative investigation. Counselling and Psychotherapy Research 7, 178–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carey, TA, Mullan, RJ (2008). Evaluating the Method of Levels. Counselling Psychology Quarterly 21, 247–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carver, CS, Scheier, MF (1982). Control theory: a useful conceptual framework for personality-social, clinical and health psychology. Psychological Bulletin 92, 111–135.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Compton, RJ, Robinson, MD, Ode, S, Quandt, LC, Fineman, SL, Carp, J (2008). Error-monitoring ability predicts daily stress regulation. Psychological Science 19, 702–708.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Forssell, D (2008). Perceptual Control Theory: Science and Applications – A Book of Readings. Hayward, CA: Living Control Systems Publishing (www.livingcontrolsystems.com).Google Scholar
Frazier, PA (2003). Perceived control and distress following sexual assault: a longitudinal test of a new model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 84, 1257–1269.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Giesen-Bloo, J, van Dyck, R, Spinhoven, P, van Tilburg, W, Dirksen, C, van Asselt, T, Kremers, I, Nadort, M, Arntz, A (2006). Outpatient psychotherapy for borderline personality disorder: randomised trial of schema-focused therapy vs transference-focused psychotherapy. Archives of General Psychiatry 63, 649–658.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gilbert, P (2005). Compassion: Conceptualisations, Research and Use in Psychotherapy. Hove, Sussex: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayes, SC, Strosahl, K, Wilson, KG (1999). Acceptance and Commitment Therapy: An Experiential Approach to Behaviour Change. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Higginson, S, Mansell, W (2008). What is the mechanism of psychological change? A qualitative analysis of six individuals who experienced personal change and recovery following a significant life difficulty. Psychology and Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice 81, 309–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
James, W (1890). The Principles of Psychology. New York: DoverGoogle Scholar
Karoly, P (1993). Mechanisms of self-regulation: a systems view. Annual Review of Psychology 44, 23–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansell, W (2005). Control theory and psychopathology. An integrative approach. Psychology and Psychotherapy: Theory Research and Practice 78, 141–178.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mansell, W (2008). What is CBT really and how can we enhance the impact of effective psychotherapies such as CBT? In: Against and For CBT. Towards a Constructive Dialogue? (ed. House, R. and Loewenthal, D.). Ross-on-Wye, UK: PCCS Books.Google Scholar
Mansell, W, Tai, SJ (2008). Introduction to the Method of Levels. Workshop presented at the Annual Conference of the British Association of Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapies, Edinburgh, UK.Google Scholar
Marken, RS (1997). The dancer and the dance: methods in the study of living control systems. Psychological Methods 2, 436–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marken, RS (2001). Controlled variables: psychology as the center fielder views it. American Journal of Psychology 114, 259–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, NE, Kraeling, D (1952). Displacement: greater generalization of approach than avoidance in a generalized approach-avoidance conflict. Journal of Experimental Psychology 43, 217–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Powers, WT (1972). An experiment with levels. In: Powers, WT (1992). Living Control Systems II: Selected Papers of William T. Powers. The Control Systems Group: Gravel Switch. Kentucky, USA.Google Scholar
Powers, WT (1973). Behaviour: The Control of Perception. Chicago, USA: Aldine Publishing Co.Google Scholar
Powers, WT (2005). Behaviour: The Control of Perception. New Canaan, CT, USA: Benchmark Publications Inc.Google Scholar
Powers, WT (2008). Living Control Systems III: The Fact of Control. New Caanan, CT, USA: Benchmark Publications.Google Scholar
Powers, WT, Clark, RK, McFarland, RL (1960). A general feedback theory of human behavior. Part II. Perceptual and Motor Skills 11, 309–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vancouver, J (2005). The depth of history and explanation as benefit and bane for psychological control theories. Journal of Applied Psychology 90, 38–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Waddington, L (2002). The therapy relationship in cognitive therapy: a review. Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy 30, 179–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watkins, E (2008). Constructive and unconstructive repetitive thought. Psychological Bulletin 134, 163–206.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wells, A, Cartwright-Hatton, S (2004). A short form of the metacognitions questionnaire: properties of the MCQ-30. Behaviour Research and Therapy 42, 385–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wells, A, Matthews, G (1994). Attention and Emotion, Hove, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.