About REBT (Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy)

About REBT (Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy) – Introduction by Dr Debbie Joffe Ellis

Those four “C” words, plus the manifesting fuel of “Action” seen in the title of this article – are they not, ideally, part of what many people might hope to attain more of and practice? Wouldn’t many people desire to feel – ongoingly, increasingly and substantially – that these ways of being are comfortably accessible and established within them, and seek help in doing so from an effective therapeutic or philosophical approach?

I believe that the answer to the above questions is a resounding “YES!”

I know of few other, perhaps no other, approaches that do so as thoroughly, and as well, and as deeply and substantially, as those of Alfred Adler’s Individual Psychology (IP) and Albert Ellis’s Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy (REBT).

Some may think I have some bias due to the fact that Albert Ellis and I were deeply connected, soul-mates, husband and wife, and worked together in all aspects of our work throughout all of our years together. That may be – although I sincerely doubt it. I was practicing and teaching REBT in Australia well before Al and I were a couple. And I was loving it, even before its creator made his way into my heart!

Al was, and I am, a member of NASAP. Being part of that family brings joy and nourishment into both my personal life and my professional life. So you would be correct to infer compatibility between the two approaches, not surprisingly, since Al respectfully acknowledged the influence of Adler in his work. I also make this acknowledgement as I continue to teach and write about REBT. There are also some differences, not surprisingly – as differences are apparent in most healthy relationships and theories!

In this article I will share with you the basics of REBT, its background and history, its unique aspects, the REBT change process, the similarities and differences between the ideas and theory of Ellis and those of Adler, and end with a note of gratitude.

What is REBT – Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy?

REBT: Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy strives to help people to achieve lasting change, and as part of that, educates them about the how-to’s of doing so. In-so-doing, REBT discourages clients from developing any unhealthy reliance on the therapist – it encourages self-effort and the resulting experience of greater empowerment so that clients can rightly claim to create their own emotional destinies. It can be asserted that REBT can be more than simply an effective evidence-based therapeutic approach. For those who apply it, it is also a healthy philosophy and a positive way of life and living.

A basic goal of REBT is to help as many people as possible to suffer less emotional misery, and thereby to experience more joy, in their lives.

What are the main ideas of Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy – REBT?

1. 1. It is not events or our circumstances that create our resultant emotional experiences and reaction, but what we tell ourselves about the events and circumstances that do so.
2. When we think in healthy and rational ways in response to adverse or unlikable circumstances, we create healthy and often life-enhancing emotions. When we think in irrational ways in response to adversity, we create debilitating and unhealthy emotions.
3. REBT takes a holistic view of a person’s life and tendencies. It reminds us that our thoughts, feelings, and behaviours are interconnected. The more healthy our thinking, the more likely it is that our consequent emotions and resultant actions will enhance our experience of life (or at the very least not have a negative or destructive impact).
4. We humans are born and reared to think in both rational and irrational ways. REBT acknowledges the influence of biological and environmentally learned aspects in our lives, and strongly reminds us that, despite and including that fact, with awareness we have choice. In other words, we can choose to experience greater happiness and contentment, or to remain less happy and miserable.
   We can choose to think about our thinking, to recognise when we are thinking in irrational ways, and then to dispute and replace such beliefs.
5. REBT teaches the differences between rational and irrational thinking:
   Rational Thinking. Rational Thinking is based on empirical reality; it creates appropriate and healthy emotions and behaviours; it includes preferences rather than demands; it encourages flexibility; it encourages healthy perspectives; it prescribes high frustration tolerance, unconditional acceptance, and the non-damning of self, others, and life; it encourages us to rate behaviours – not our essential selves; it removes the Tyranny of the “Shoulds” and “Musts”.
   Irrational Thinking. Irrational Thinking creates debilitating and unhealthy negative emotions and behaviours; it includes rigid and dogmatic demands; it leads to low frustration tolerance; it includes absolutistic attitudes and overgeneralising; it exaggerates facts, and includes “awfulising” and “catastrophising” (expressions created by Ellis); it creates low frustration tolerance and damnation of self/others and life when things don’t go the ways demanded that they should go; it rates the worth of self/others/life.
   Three core Irrational Beliefs that REBT identifies, from which countless others stem, are:
   – I must always do well and be loved and approved by others
   – You must treat me well and act the way I think you should
   – Life should be fair and just.
6. REBT clearly distinguishes between the Healthy and Unhealthy Negative Emotions.
   (Negative in this context does not mean bad, but means unpleasant, painful or unenjoyable).
   REBT asserts that when we think in Irrational ways in response to not getting what we want, or to getting what we don’t want, we are likely to create one or more of the self-defeating and Unhealthy Negative Emotions which include anxiety, depression, rage, guilt, shame, jealousy.
   When we think in rational ways, in response to the same circumstances, we are likely to create Healthy Negative Emotions (non-debilitating, and often motivating or enriching), such as concern, sadness and grief, healthy anger, regret.
7. REBT offers the simple to follow and apply “A B C D E Self Help Approach for Emotional Disturbance”, through which one clarifies the connection between an activating event and its consequences by identifying the irrational beliefs involved. It then provides the means for replacing irrational beliefs with rational ones through disputation and the creation of effective new beliefs. People are encouraged to apply the ABCDE procedure as follows, identifying:
   A – Activating Event
   C – Consequences: Emotions and/or Behaviours
   B – Beliefs: Identify the Irrational Beliefs (yes, in this framework B follows C!)
   D – Disputing of the Irrational Beliefs:
   i) Realistic Disputing – “Where is it written, where is the evidence? …”
   ii) Logical Disputing – “Does it follow that …?”
   iii) Pragmatic Disputing – “Where will it get me to maintain this irrational belief …?”
   E – Effective New Philosophies: These are healthy, functional and realistic beliefs that replace the former irrational ones as a consequence of thorough disputing, and for lasting change it is important to go over them often and regularly.
8. Lasting Change comes from Ongoing Effort and Practice.
   REBT reminds us that maintaining therapeutic and other gains requires ongoing work and practice, work and practice, work and practice! Homework is an essential part of REBT therapeutic practice. Techniques suggested by the therapist, or those selected for practice by an individual doing self-help, can be chosen from many which include:
   Cognitive – The ABCDE Self-Help Form, Vigorous Disputing, Cost/Benefit Analysis, Distraction Activities, Modeling, Psycho-education, Bibliotherapy, Audiotherapy and Videotherapy (Reading/hearing/viewing useful material).
   Emotive – Rational Emotive Imagery, Shame-Attacking Exercises, Creating and Repeating Strong Coping Statements, Role Play, Forcefully Disputing one’s irrational beliefs which one has recorded or written.
   Behavioural – Risk-Taking (Safe), In-Vivo Desensitization, Staying in a difficult situation (when safe to do so) to develop High Frustration Tolerance, Skill Training, Relapse Prevention, Reinforcement, Use of Humor, and Rational Emotive Songs.
   (More details on all of the above can be found in scores of books by Albert Ellis, and in the 2011 Ellis & Ellis book included in the references at the end of this article).
9. Unconditional Acceptance.
   REBT strongly emphasises the importance of the practices of 3 forms of Unconditional Acceptance – namely: (i) Unconditional Self Acceptance (USA)
   (ii) Unconditional Other Acceptance (UOA)
   (iii) Unconditional Life Acceptance (ULA)
   Unconditional Other Acceptance (UOA) has for years up until this day been controversial, with some people arguing that it is foolish and unrealistic to expect people to unconditionally accept others who have acted in brutal and cruel ways against them. Al and I continued to point out that unconditionally accepting that the person still has worth, despite and including their grave flaws and misdeeds, does not mean that we accept the rotten behaviour. Certainly REBT is all for seeking justice, but asserts that it may be more aptly attained when coming from a place of emotional stability than from rage and damnation of others. REBT invites us to think about the many people – some reported in the media, others who we may know in our personal lives – who have succeeded in attaining UOA, and genuinely applied forgiveness of the person or people who assaulted them – though not forgiving the bad deeds. REBT invites us to consider that if we had had the backgrounds of those who act in despicable ways, and their brain chemistry, and had been thinking the thoughts they had thought when doing their evil actions – then in all probability we might have acted in similar ways. This is commonly thought of as having empathy, and walking a mile in others shoes.
   For those of us who are not cognitively impaired, and who recognise that we can choose our attitudes, it IS possible to work to attain and experience more UOA more of the time. And well worth it. REBT vigorously encourages us to do so.

What is the Background and History of REBT?

Unlike many other therapeutic approaches, a large component in the formation and development of REBT, was the creative and brilliant ability Albert Ellis displayed, starting at a remarkably young age, to find practical ways to cope with, and reduce, his own emotional suffering. He successfully applied ideas and actions that were to become part of REBT well before he could even imagine being a therapist.

From infancy and throughout his childhood he experienced various illnesses including nephritis and stomach problems, often having to spend a stretch of months in hospital. His family rarely visited him, and he felt deeply sad. Deciding that he didn’t want to feel so sad – he read books from the children’s hospital library, talked to fellow patients and their visitors, fell in love with his pretty nurses, used his imagination to think about what he would do when he grew up, and invented games that he and the other children in his ward could play after lights out. These actions helped him focus on things other than his sadness and neglect by his parents, and were fine examples of the effectiveness of cognitive distraction – which became and is an oft used technique of REBT.

When a teenage youth leader of a radical political group he had severe phobia about public speaking and never dared to give a speech till he read of the early work of John B. Watson and the success of using in-vivo desensitisation with young children to help them get over their intense fears of animals. Al forced himself, very uncomfortably, to speak often in public – and within weeks got over his phobia to the degree that he enjoyed public speaking greatly. He would often say in workshops and lectures when recalling that time: “I completely got over my phobia, and now you can’t keep me away from the public speaking platform!”

He tackled his social phobia and fear of talking to women, his other major paralyzing phobia, in a similar way: using in-vivo desensitisation. He gave himself the homework for the month of August of sitting next to at least 100 women on park benches in the Bronx Botanical Gardens and starting conversations with them. Although he only made one date, and she didn’t show up, he totally got over his fear of approaching women! In-vivo desensitisation became and remains one of the frequently used techniques of REBT.

He read avidly, and elements of REBT can be recognised as having been influenced by some of the wise sages and philosophers he enjoyed. Unlike some contemporary theorists in our field, Ellis regularly gave credit to those who influenced and inspired elements of his work, and he did not take credit for, or pretend to be inventing, any wheels that his predecessors had so ably done. It is a pity to observe that the contributions of Ellis, Adler and some others who are no longer alive are being neglected in the writings and teachings of some people who come up with new and appealing titles for their approaches, yet who are blatantly including elements of their predecessors without giving them due credit.
Some of the people and philosophies that Al acknowledged included Gautama Buddha, Zen Buddhists, certain Hindu Yoga practices, even aspects in the ancient Hebrew and Christian philosophies – despite Al’s position taken for most of his life as a “probabilistic atheist”.

He was particularly taken with Greek and Roman philosophers, including the works of Epicurus, Epictetus, and Marcus Aurelius.

During the period in the early 1940’s in which Al worked as a clinical sexologist, he followed works of Havelock Ellis, W.F. Robie and others who were physicians and practiced what could be called cognitive behaviour sex therapy. Al was a contributing figure to the sexual revolution in America in the twentieth century, writing and speaking about sexuality in the 1940’s and throughout his life. He was one of very few to loudly advocate for equal rights for gays, and for women’s rights in the 1950’s and onwards. He was a pioneering feminist, and particularly taught women how they could choose to be assertive and not aggressive. He was a founder of the Society for the Scientific Study of Sexuality.

Al was inspired by writings of the general semanticist Alfred Korzybski, and those of philosophers including Bertrand Russell, Paul Dubois and Emile Coue (the latter two used persuasive forms of psychotherapy). He enjoyed the works of Alexander Herzberg (who included homework assignments in his work) and the works of existential philosophers of his times, such as Kierkegaard, Heidegger, Sartre and Tillich.

When Al was trained in and practicing liberal psychoanalysis, he thought of himself as more of an existential analyst. Influences at that time included Erich Fromm, Karen Horney, Harry Stack Sullivan, and Alfred Adler.

Al increasingly found the psychoanalysis he was using with his clients to be too passive, inefficient, and lacking in educational and behavioural elements. He became more active-directive with his clients, and abandoned the psychoanalysis in 1953, developing the approach now known as REBT. (It was first called Rational Therapy (RT), then Rational Emotive Therapy (RET) in the early 1960’s, and in 1993 became known as Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy).

In his final decade of life in our work together, we began to present workshops on REBT and Buddhism. We would give much focus to, and emphasis on, the REBT tenets of Unconditional Acceptance – parts of REBT from its inception, yet in the climate of growing terrorism in that first decade of the new century, we perhaps focused more frequently upon them than Al might have done at times in the past.

In his final years some unanticipated and brutal events took place in our work life, the original mission statement for his Institute that he had created around 1959 had been changed without Al’s knowledge, he was dismissed from duties, no longer permitted to do any work or teaching within the Institute, and was ousted from the board of which he had been president. He did what he could in his fight for justice: there were 2 lawsuits, the outcome of one lawsuit was that he was reinstated to the board, yet after the reinstatement he had no practical power within it and not long after that he succumbed to pneumonia. He made exhausting efforts to regain health and strength for the 15 months that followed, and yet despite his superhuman efforts, on July 24th, 2007 he passed. He died before the second law suit could be completed.

His final years contained the saddest period in his life – he felt shocked and deeply sad at what had happened in his Institute.

The Master was being tested, and he passed the test with distinction. He practiced what he preached till his end. Despite his disdain for the actions of the people involved, he hated what they did, but he didn’t hate them. He felt compassion for them. In consoling me one day as my tears fell and I felt deeply sad following an action against him that I considered cruel and appalling from some of the people, he said to me: “Debbie – you are forgetting to practice REBT now. You are such a good teacher and therapist – but now you are not applying it to yourself. Accept, accept, accept – they have to do what they are doing when they think the way that they are thinking. Accept.”

He applied REBT attitude and action, through practically every jolt and nasty situation. Accepting did not mean inaction. We did what we could to bring about change, and did not allow ourselves to curl into depressed, passive and inert bundles of inactivity. We continued teaching and presenting in a very large rented room in the building next door.

Accepting what IS, doesn’t mean not striving and acting to change it. But in accepting, there is the probability of feeling less rage, depression and anxiety – and of experiencing instead a healthy concentrated, determined and motivating drive to affect change, and also feeling disappointment, sadness and concern – none of which debilitate, and may facilitate the carrying out of productive actions.

In Al’s final months, when it was clear that his health was rapidly declining and not likely to improve, and that it was unlikely that in his lifetime he would witness the justice that he sought, we continued to practice what he preached. Despite our deep sadness, ache and disappointment (and on top of that – Al was in great physical pain much of the time), we focused on what was good in our lives. And that was our profound love. In-so-doing we prevented ourselves from creating rage, or depression, or anxiety.

Each day we would hold and hug one another, if he was in too much pain for our lying together in his hospital bed, I would stroke his head and hands, we felt deeply grateful that we had one another, that we were together, and for our rare and profound love. Despite and including all the bitter circumstances we were facing and enduring, we focused more on our love.

In the work I have done and continue to do since Al’s passing in 2007, I give great emphasis in my teaching and writing to the importance and benefit of striving to experience and practice unconditional acceptance, gratitude, compassion, kindness, awe and wonder in one’s daily life. Again – these are not new components of the REBT philosophy, but some I choose to focus on and magnify during these times of increasing random and brutal violence and unrest.

What are the Unique Aspects of REBT?

There are a few aspects quite unique to REBT, described below. Although one or some of them may be seen or referred to, to some degree, in other approaches, it appears at this time that the others do not emphasise them as much.

1. REBT’s emphasis on unconditional acceptance as already referred to earlier in this article, and REBT’s goal of addressing a person’s philosophy of life and living.
   In 2003 Albert Ellis and, in a separate article, Aaron T. Beck & Christine A. Padesky compared Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy with Cognitive Therapy. In 2005 Ellis’s article discussing those papers was published. In it he noted that whilst in 2003 all three authors agreed that REBT is largely a philosophically based psychotherapy, and CT more empirically based, Ellis later saw that as only partly true. He believed that both approaches are philosophically and empirically based systems – however that indeed REBT is the more philosophical of the two.
2. REBT emphasises the importance and benefit of vigorous, thorough and substantial disputing of irrational ideas, prior to recognising their rational counterparts. Many, if not most, therapeutic approaches would at some point discourage irrational thinking, and encourage clients to replace unhelpful beliefs with healthy and realistic ones, however no approaches that this author is aware of urge clients to apply such a systematic, forceful, energetic and concentrated effort to dispute the irrational beliefs (“Zap them!”) as REBT does before replacing them with the new rational ones.
3. REBT offers three clear forms of disputation, as mentioned earlier: (i) Realistic Disputing (ii) Logical Disputing (iii) Pragmatic Disputing.
4. Whilst attending to cognition and behaviour, REBT gives great attention to the emotional element of therapy and wellbeing ( its “E”!). One of the false myths over the years has been that REBT neglects to do so. For many years Ellis and Fritz Perls carried on a feud and debated strongly following the accusation by Perls that REBT was too intellectual and ignored any emotional element. Other writers credited Ellis for highlighting the cognitive element, and yet what many neglected, and still fail to recognise is that he equally highlighted the emotive aspect. He clearly distinguished between what he called healthy and unhealthy negative emotions (referred to earlier in this article). REBT encourages us to embrace the healthy negative emotions rather than to avoid or eliminate them, and actively teaches the difference between them and the debilitating unhealthy ones and the process of creating the healthy ones.
5. REBT urges therapists to practice what they preach. Many REBT therapists may not do so, or may do so to a limited extent, yet may still be effective in helping clients due to REBT’s clear structure, framework, theory, methods and elegance. However it asserts that therapists may be even more effective when practicing it in their own daily lives because:
   (i) They may display an added component of greater authenticity, which can allow stronger empathy and rapport in the client-therapist relationship
   (ii) They act as credible models of the approach
   (iii) They make ongoing effort to keep themselves stable, steady and un-upset during challenging times in their own lives which, in all probability, can enable them to remain focused and effective during sessions.
   REBT is not the only approach that actively encourages these practices. On a personal note, in my years of membership in NASAP, in getting to know a good number of members, I felt inspired by the many who clearly demonstrated their mindful application of Adlerian tenets in both our professional and our leisurely and playful interactions.

What is The REBT Change Process?

Spoiler alert: the probability of a familiar and cringe-worthy joke lies just ahead, but in the interest of modelling healthy risk-taking – here it goes!

Question: How many therapists does it take to change a light bulb? Answer: Only one, but the light bulb has to really want to change.

In REBT, as in many other approaches, lasting change for clients is attained through their making an on-going effort. An initial part of the process is the clarification of therapeutic goals. Homework is a core part of the REBT therapeutic journey, as is encouraging the client to self reflect, explore, and identify their beliefs and philosophy of life and living. REBT encourages clients to make an ongoing effort to challenge self-defeating ideas, dispute them, and replace them. REBT is not known for simply removing or placating symptoms, but aims to facilitate profound and lasting beneficial changes in the thinking, emotional, and active life of the client. REBT takes into account the tendency that we all can have to relapse into previous dysfunctional states, so has built into it relapse prevention methods. These methods include regular self-monitoring, vigorous application of the disputing methods which had been helpful in the past, and perhaps most importantly – the practice of unconditional self-acceptance despite and including any relapses.

The effective REBT therapist ideally motivates clients to persist at making an effort to reduce emotional misery and maximise joy and tranquillity. This may include inviting the client to consider the consequences with clear and direct honesty, to avoid the arresting of efforts to change, and also may include helping the client to envision the fruits of continuing to make efforts and choices that enhance their lives.

The effective REBT therapist models unconditional other acceptance when there are relapses, warmly acknowledges progress the client makes on his or her therapeutic journey, and encourages ongoing forward movement.

The therapist also makes an effort to develop rapport with the client. A gross misconception about REBT is that REBT asserts that rapport and the demonstration of empathy does not matter very much in the therapeutic process. This is false, and is a distortion of REBT’s encouragement to therapists to avoid allowing the client to predominantly depend on the therapist to “make them feel better.” Instead, REBT assists clients to work on removing any excessive and inappropriate need to feel accepted by the therapist. REBT encourages clients to take responsibility for their emotions, and teaches the methods for doing so. However, that does not preclude the benefit of rapport and empathy from the therapists in assisting their clients to learn the tools and construct positive change.

A possible reason for the misconception referred to here was the judgement about the vigorous style and manner of Albert Ellis when he conducted his demonstrations and sessions. His direct approach, his no-nonsense style, and his frequent use of colourful language, led to some people wrongly inferring that his style was the only recommended REBT style. It also led to the inaccurate assumption that his manner prevented rapport and demonstrated an absence of empathy. There is no doubting that his manner was not everyone’s cup of tea (as we say down under!) but he did not suggest that others copy it.

The effective REBT practitioner applies the tenets, theory, methods, and philosophy of REBT – but in their unique way and in their own unique style and manner. Al encouraged this approach in his supervision groups which I co-led with him in his final years, and in his many trainings and workshops.

As for the assertion that his style and manner prevented rapport and empathy – for some clients that may have been true, but the massive number of letters, and verbal feedback he received, indicated the opposite. The letters and feedback from these people described their experience and sense of his truly understanding them, and the appreciation of his direct and honest communication. They felt that he genuinely cared about them and their well-being. The number of people who expressed such gratitude is too difficult to guess at or estimate. A good number of prominent writers, teachers and practitioners, some of whom do not even practice REBT, have also expressed such appreciation.

The effective REBT therapist listens well, and educates himself/herself about aspects of the culture, religious, or non-religious background of their clients. In so doing they can be better equipped to form rapport by understanding client’s unique cultural elements, and by choosing respectful ways of communicating that are less likely to be dismissed or misinterpreted by clients of different cultural backgrounds.

REBT is largely psycho-educational, and in addition to print and video material on REBT that can be recommended to clients, the REBT therapist will also suggest materials of other approaches or philosophies if deemed helpful, hence is truly multi-modal in form. The effective therapist also stays abreast of current news, inspiring stories in particular, and popular books and movies that support themes being worked on in therapy that can be recommended to clients.
A strong part of the change process is the willingness the client has to be mindful, and to reflect on their thinking, and to take appropriate actions. Awareness is a key element in change, and is highlighted and encouraged. To that end, some clients are encouraged to learn and practice forms of meditation and relaxation.

It is also beneficial when the client keeps himself or herself motivated to keep making an effort towards healthy change, with realistic expectations – including the fact that change may not happen overnight or as quickly as they want. As a result, patience, high frustration tolerance, and endurance are encouraged.

REBT in the form of brief therapy is sufficient for some, but for those with deeper issues and disturbances longer term REBT therapy is helpful. Those requiring brief therapy can experience significant changes within 5 to 12 sessions (for some, in even fewer sessions). Achieving productive results through brief therapy depends on the ability and willingness of the clients to take responsibility for constructing their emotional well-being, learning the tenets of REBT, and applying them on a frequent and regular basis.

Clients with severe emotional disturbances, greater endogenous disturbances, co-occurring conditions, or poor learning skills benefit from longer term REBT therapy. Whilst a course of individual therapy is recommended, over time some clients may benefit from both individual and group therapy. As progress continues, they may solely attend group therapy as a means of beneficial reinforcement and the enhancement and maintenance of their therapeutic gains. Such clients are welcomed to return for individual sessions if or when they may benefit from direct one-to-one refresher sessions, particularly if they have experienced any relapses.

A detailed description of the application of REBT to various and specific conditions such as perfectionism, obsessive compulsive disorder, borderline personality disorders, addiction, the treatment of people with co-occurring problems, severe emotional disturbances and self-defeating behaviours, and other issues would turn this writing into a book instead of an article! Hence readers are strongly encouraged to read about such applications in one or many of the books by Ellis, and in the 2011 book we co-authored, cited in the references at the end of this article.

What is common in REBT treatment of the above mentioned conditions is the setting of goals, the exploration of the beliefs contributing to debilitating emotions and unwanted behaviours, the ongoing encouragement and acknowledgement of any and all gains achieved by the clients, relapse prevention, the demonstration of tolerance, non-judgement and acceptance if relapse does occur, the giving of homework activities to be done between sessions, and the teaching, reminding, and encouraging of clients to make on-going efforts to accept themselves, unconditionally, as worthwhile humans. Such unconditional self acceptance is of immense benefit to clients despite and including the challenges of any restrictive tendencies, biological conditions, difficulties in applying recommendations and relapses.

What are the similarities and differences between the ideas and theory of Ellis & REBT and those of Adler?

If there is an afterlife, I feel certain that Ellis and Adler are enjoying each other’s company immensely. I can see them in my mind’s eye absorbed in lively discussions and debates. I envision them easily getting and appreciating one another’s wit and humour, laughing readily and often. Though perhaps more dignified at times in his selection of words, Adler would, I think, heartily enjoy Al’s at-times earthier vocabulary and style which in no way diminished Al’s unusual and unique manner of dignity and authenticity.

In a nutshell, there appear to be many similarities, some differences, and a good amount of overlap in the approaches of Adler and Ellis. In my view it is highly likely that if Adler had lived and worked for more years, he may have come up with some methods very similar to those that Al created after Adler’s passing that are essential parts of REBT. I have been presenting on REBT at each of the NASAP annual conferences after Al’s passing in 2007, and attendees have often commented on how practical the REBT techniques and methods are, that they are superbly compatible with Individual Psychology, and that they see how fitting and seamless it can be to integrate them into Individual Psychology’s therapy.
Al acknowledged Adler with gratitude as being one of his main mentors, expressing frequently in his writings, lectures, and trainings throughout all of his, and our, work years that REBT owes great debt to him. Both Adler and Ellis embraced the importance of empirical knowledge along with the philosophical component in their approaches, emphasised the importance of action and of psycho-education. Let’s have a more detailed look at similarities, what REBT adds to some of the areas of overlap, and differences.

Adler and Ellis are rightly known as pioneers of cognitive approaches in psychology. Both strongly recognised the interrelationship between our thoughts, behaviours, and our emotions, and that individuals are responsible for their own emotional experiences and behaviours.

They both believed that it is not external circumstances or people that create our emotions and influence our lives, but the view we take about them. Both encouraged us to change rigid and unhealthy beliefs, and Ellis added to this. He did so by clearly distinguishing, specifying, and clarifying the differences between rational and irrational thinking. This process makes it easier to identify, and therefore to target, dispute, and change, the latter. He also added to it by describing specific irrational beliefs that contribute to the creation of disturbing emotions and self-defeating behaviours.

Neither of them gave much attention to Freudian-like notions of the threats and dangers of dormant motivations within the “unconscious” that could rise up and impact the person. However they acknowledged the impact of unexamined beliefs and unconsciously perpetuated statements that do influence or create consequential emotions and behaviours.

They both strongly asserted that the worth of an individual cannot be scientifically or empirically measured, and that it is simply a given. They saw the benefit of rating our traits and behaviours as positive or negative, helpful or unhelpful, healthy or destructive – and the importance of NOT rating ourselves along the same lines.

They both recognised that when many people evaluate themselves they are rating their traits and actions as inadequate, and then overgeneralise so that their entire being or personhood is seen as inferior or worthless. In other words, as Al used to say, people rate their whole self instead of merely rating what they do, thereby creating what Adler called inferiority feelings. They agreed that people with such feelings put themselves down and also can overgeneralise and condemn others who they are judging as bad or wrong -thereby creating rage and hatred.

Al added to these recognitions some precise “how-to’s” and guidelines for not rating and damning ourselves and others. REBT guides and encourages us:
(i) To identify our precise self-evaluating and other-evaluating ideas, the demanding ‘shoulds and musts’ beliefs, and self-damning, other-damning and life-damning thoughts,
(ii) To challenge and vigorously dispute irrational beliefs (realistically, logically, pragmatically), and then –
(iii) To come up with healthy beliefs, and work to increase unconditionally accepting attitudes towards ourselves and others. REBT encourages us to do this, ongoingly, until we notice over time we are less frequently or rarely rating ourselves and others, though continuing to helpfully rate behaviours we and others perform.
(iv) To minimise conditional self acceptance, feelings of inferiority, and related needs to compensate, by making on-going efforts to acquire greater unconditional self acceptance despite any failings or deficiency of any traits, skills or talents, and to make ongoing and diligent efforts to experience greater unconditional other acceptance to minimise feelings of hostility and resentment towards others despite their wrong-doings.

As mentioned earlier, psycho-education of the client was encouraged by both Adler and Ellis, teaching clients to understand the difference between their healthy and disturbing thinking, and reminding clients to keep on making effort to change and replace the latter.

Both Adler and Ellis recognised that for change to take place and be maintained within clients, action (or as Adler would say – their “own doing”) is required. However Al added something to this. He believed that to maximise and fuel effective action for change, simply thinking rational thoughts in a mild manner may not be enough. He urged the inclusion of an emotive element to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of healthy thinking for promoting effective action: namely, the inclusion of “a forceful, energetic and determined element” (Ellis, 1979). He asserted that more vigorous and dramatic thinking “goes one step further to include the determination to act and the actual action that backs up this kind of change-oriented cognition.” This could explain why Ellis was often so bold, vigorous, intense and dramatic in his delivery of lectures and in trainings. He wanted to demonstrate, and model, the strong approach and attitude that, when applied as a manner of thinking, could help people’s effectiveness at disputing, changing and replacing irrational and debilitating beliefs.

It could be rightly said that both were pioneers of the self-help movement.

Both Adler and Ellis were, and their approaches are, highly encouraging of, and motivating for, people. Both approaches consistently acknowledge progress, encourage ongoing effort, and strongly attempt to persuade clients to be more healthily constructive, positive, persistent, and goal oriented.

An area of possible difference might be the therapeutic style and manner of each approach. Al wrote (1962) that Adler espoused a more passive view of preferable therapeutic technique and that Adler expressed a need for caution regarding adopting persuasive guidance of clients. REBT is known to be active and directive, vigorous and assertive in manner. I was not born till many decades after Adler’s passing so, but I did and do know the therapeutic style and manner of Albert Ellis.
I wrote above that their presumed styles “might be” different rather than my writing that they were different. Though Al was very often strong and vigorous in manner as I described earlier, there were certain clients with whom Al was less vigorous at times when he believed that they may be more receptive if he adopted a gentler manner. My hunch is that when an Adlerian therapist assesses that it could serve the client, and be of little or no risk, the Adlerian therapist might express something in a vigorous, strong and assertive manner.

When I have demonstrated REBT with volunteers at NASAP conferences, which sometimes included my selectively expressing in vigorous and strong manner at times, never (so far) have any of the volunteers I demonstrated with, or attendees who viewed the demonstrations, accused me of being grossly anti-Adlerian in style or manner!

In 1962 Al wrote that he thought that Adler might have taken issue with his REBT views on social interest. Al wrote that REBT believes that: “efficient human behaviour must be primarily based on self-interest; and that, if it is so based, it will by logical necessity also have to be rooted in social interest. Adler seemed to believe the reverse: that only through a primary social interest could an individual achieve maximum self-love and happiness” (Ellis, 1962, p.322), and added that Adler also wrote: “All my efforts are devoted toward increasing the social interest of the patient” (Ibid, p.323). Al pointed out that the REBT therapist would prefer to say that most of their efforts are devoted toward increasing the self-interest of the patient, with the conviction that if the individual adopts attitudes and actions in their interest, it would tend to create a high degree of social interest in them as well – a strong goal of REBT.
I believe that it is probable that the beliefs of Adler and Ellis on the issue of self interest vs social interest may not have been as poles apart as might initially appear to be the case. REBT, as described earlier, avoids overgeneralising and absolutistic thinking. REBT strongly and vigorously encourages self interest and social interest, both/and, but perhaps asserts that the latter may have a greater chance of being attained for many people when they initially make effort to achieve more of the former.

Ellis pointed out in books and talks that REBT tends to make less use of dream material and of early recollections than does Adlerian therapy. REBT also does not initiate exploration of birth order or family constellations, however that does not imply that any or all such exploration would be dismissed or rejected by an effective REBT practitioner. Whilst the REBT therapist may not spend as much time on, or actively seek out, the childhood memories and dreams of clients as an Adlerian therapist might do, if the clients presented dreams or memories, and if the REBT therapist assessed that discussing them might be of benefit to the clients – there would not be any avoidance of doing so. In such a discussion, the intention and focus would largely be on considering whether beliefs about the dream images or childhood memories might be negatively or positively impacting the clients in their ‘here-and-now’ daily lives. If negative impact was recognised – a next step might be the identifying of any irrational beliefs about the dreams or the meanings the clients gave to the dreams, and about childhood experiences, that could be contributing to the construction of the clients’ unhealthy emotions and behaviours in the present. The therapist and clients would then continue the process by the disputing of such beliefs and the constructing of healthy new beliefs.

REBT certainly does not dismiss the influence of past experiences, but reminds us that we can choose to dwell-on past traumas and the like – to our detriment. REBT suggests that we focus more on the fact that we survived these traumas and can choose to apply compassion to ourselves whilst reminding ourselves of the resilience and strength we have and can develop. We can choose to focus less on what was, and more on what is. REBT discourages the perpetuating of beliefs that create emotional disturbance, but in-so-doing is not dismissive or trivialising of any hardships or traumas that have been endured.

Conclusion

As I conclude here, I think back to the title of this article: Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy: Courage, Compassion, Creativity, Care and Action!

I believe that both REBT and Adlerian Psychology are imbued with those qualities and encourage clients and therapists alike to embody and express them. I trust that you, my reader, have already noticed that implicit and explicit in the philosophy of REBT are the attitudes of compassion and care, and the call to take action in order to affect change. But perhaps not as clear yet in this article are the elements of courage and creativity within the approaches. These are intrinsic parts of REBT, and I would assert that is the case also in Adlerian Psychology.

Courage is evident in the urging and encouragement to face facts, and to accept realities of past and present that cannot be changed, without railing against the unfairness and painful circumstances. Courage is called upon and encouraged, in practitioners and clients, to assist them in continuing forward, focusing on what is good in their lives, focusing more on the here and now, whilst creating life-enhancing goals and intentions. It is encouraged that these actions be done with strong determination – despite and including difficulties, challenges, any past painful situations, and/or the brutal behaviours from others.
Creativity is seen in the flexibility inherent within the approaches. In REBT, clear techniques and methods are offered, yet practitioners – both therapists and clients, and self-helpers – are also encouraged to come up with any original ideas and applications as “homework” that can enhance quality of life and the attainment of healthy goals.

I love REBT and the inspiring example of Albert Ellis who practiced what he preached. I have always considered REBT more than an effective evidence-based theory and psycho-therapeutic approach. It is also indubitably a philosophy, a holistic approach and a way of life for those who use it as such. The same could be said of Adlerian Psychology.

I share the concern expressed by colleagues such as Jon Carlson (2015) about an apparent neglect by many in our field to sufficiently acknowledge the massive and profound contributions of Adler and Ellis. As time goes on, and in the years since Al’s passing, I have heard that some introductory psychology courses barely give mention to either Al or Adler. A number of my students have told me that prior to studying REBT with me, they believed that REBT was an offshoot of CBT and did not realise that REBT preceded and influenced CBT, as Aaron T. Beck has respectfully acknowledged. Some students had hardly heard of Adler in their counselling courses.

I make efforts to maintain hope and cautious optimism that true facts and history will not be distorted or neglected. Some days it takes extra effort to do so! However I remind myself that as long as those of us who have written for this journal, and the many others in our field who teach, write, and enjoy the privilege of working as therapists, continue to share facts and teach the undiluted principles of the approaches we embrace, and as long as readers, clients and students are willing to read, think about and learn from them, there is hope that the beauty and elegance of REBT, and the other approaches presented in this journal, will live on. There is hope that REBT and the others will continue to benefit countless people who strive to embrace life, to cherish their moments, to minimise suffering and to maximise joy. That is what REBT intends to contribute, that was the goal of Albert Ellis in creating it, and I and many others feel immensely grateful to the remarkable Albert Ellis, to Alfred Adler, and to Al’s other mentors. Deeply grateful.

References.

Adler, A. (1927) Understanding Human Nature. New York: Garden City Publishing Company.
Adler, A. (1929) The Science of Living. New York: Greenberg.
Carlson, J. (2015). Overlooking Adler. New Therapist Magazine, November/December, 22-25.
Ellis, A. (1962) Reason and Emotion in Psychotherapy. Secaucus, N.J.: Citadel.
Ellis, A. (1973) Humanistic Psychotherapy. New York, N.Y. McGraw-Hill Book Company and Julian Press.
Ellis, A. (1979) The Issue of Force and Energy in Behavioral Change. Journal of Contemporary Psychotherapy, Vol. 10, No. 2 Fall/Winter 1979, 83-97.
Ellis, A. (2003) Similarities and differences between Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy and Cognitive Therapy. Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy: An International Quarterly, 17 (3) 225-240.
Ellis, A. (2005) Discussion of Christine A. Padesky & Aaron T. Beck, “Science and philosophy: Comparison of Cognitive Therapy and Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy.” Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy: An International Quarterly, 19 (2), 181-189.
Ellis, A. (with Ellis D.J.) (2010) All Out: An Autobiography. Amherst, N.Y. Prometheus Books.
Ellis, A. & Ellis, D.J. (2011) Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy. Washington D.C. American Psychological Association.
Ellis, D.J. (2015). Reflections: The Profound Impact of Gratitude In Times of Ease and Times of Challenge, in Journal of Spirituality in Clinical Practice, Vol. 2, No. 1, 96-100. Washington D.C. American Psychological Association.
Padesky, C.A. & Beck, A.T. (2003) Science and Philosophy: Comparison of Cognitive Therapy and Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy. Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy: An International Quarterly, 17 (3) 211-224.