Office in Walnut Creek, California CA
Jay Slupesky, M.A., MFT
A controlled study was done on undergraduate students enrolled in a public speaking class at a major private university. Those students who indicated that they had a moderate to severe anxiety about speaking in public were selected to participate in the study. The subjects were divided into three groups: (1) a group which received REBT therapy, (2) a group which received an attention placebo consisting of instruction in relaxation techniques, and (3) a group which received no treatment. Analysis of the measured data showed that both REBT and the placebo were more effective than no treatment. However, REBT was not conclusively shown to outperform the placebo. Unfortunately, this study was not externally valid because of the small number of subjects and their lack of diversity. Also, no individuals with a severe phobia of public speaking were included in the study.
Albert Ellis's Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT) is a brief and solution-oriented approach which focuses on resolving specific symptoms facing a troubled individual. At the core of REBT is the notion that our emotions result solely from our beliefs, not by the events that occur in our lives. Those individuals whose beliefs are healthy and rational will experience emotional growth and happiness. On the other hand, those with irrational and self-defeating beliefs suffer from neuroses such as self-blame, depression, and anxiety. REBT is an educational process in which the therapist teaches the client how to identify irrational beliefs, dispute them, and replace them with rational beliefs. Once the client is equipped with healthy beliefs, emotional difficulties and problematic behaviors are abated (Corey, 2001). Trexler and Karst (1972) studied the efficacy of REBT in the treatment of college students who suffered from a fear of speaking in public.
The researchers were interested in measuring the efficacy of Rational-Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT) in the treatment of public-speaking anxiety. They questioned whether group REBT therapy would show better results than a placebo group and a no-treatment group. Based on earlier studies, they hypothesized that the REBT group would show better results than both the placebo and the no treatment groups (Trexler & Karst, 1972).
The researchers recruited their subjects from students enrolled in an introductory class in public speaking at a major private university. Those students who volunteered to participate in the study where asked to rate their fear of public speaking on a 1-10 scale. Those who rated their fear level as 4 or higher and who did not have scheduling conflicts with the research were asked to participate. None of the students rated themselves at level 10, which corresponded to a phobia and a complete avoidance of public-speaking situations.
A total of 16 male and 17 female undergraduate students took part in the study. The researchers divided the subjects randomly into three comparably-sized groups, and each group had roughly the same number of males as females. The first group received REBT in groups of three, the second group received an attention placebo which consisted solely of instruction in relaxation techniques, and the third group received no treatment.
Pre-therapy and post-therapy measurements were made by both observational judgments and self-reporting. The observations were made by two trained observers who were blind as to which treatment group the subjects were assigned. The observers recorded three measurements: (1) index finger sweat levels during test speeches, (2) a 12-item checklist of anxiety-indicating speech behaviors, and (3) a global judgment of anxiety on a 15-point scale. Inter-judge reliability between the two judges ranged from a low of 0.71 to a high of 0.94.
The subjects self-reported three measurements: (1) an Irrational Beliefs Test, (2) a 15-point anxiety scale, filled in just prior to speaking, (3) a 30-item Speaker Confidence report. Test-retest reliabilities for these self-reports ranged from a low of 0.81 to a high of 0.94. The researchers also administered a post-therapy questionnaire asking about the subjects' belief in the efficacy of therapy that they had received.
The subjects gave three-minute speeches in a small room. The stood in front of a floor microphone and were recorded. The audience consisted solely of the two trained observers.
The REBT group received four group sessions spaced several days apart. The primary researcher served as the therapist. The attention placebo group received instruction in relaxation techniques and was told that it was a well-regarded method for reducing general anxiety. The no treatment group was told only that there would be an unforeseen delay before their therapy would begin (Trexler & Karst, 1972).
Analysis of the data showed that REBT was more effective no treatment. The REBT group showed more improvement than the no treatment group in all three of the observation measurements and all three of the self-report measurements. The most dramatic improvement was in the self-reported Irrational Beliefs Test. The attention placebo was also judged to be more effective than no treatment. However, the researchers were unable to definitively conclude that REBT was more effective than the placebo. For example, the placebo outperformed REBT in the self-reported 15-point anxiety scale (Trexler & Karst, 1972).
This study is internally valid because all variables other than the treatment method were strictly controlled. For example, the students were randomly assigned to one of the three groups. Also, the observers were blind as to which group a particular subject was assigned. Finally, and most importantly, the existence of the attention placebo group and the no treatment group mediated any other influences on the subjects.
This study is not externally valid because of the small number of subjects and their lack of diversity. All of the subjects were students at a major private university, which tends to indicate a higher intelligence and a higher financial bracket. Also, the mere fact that they were undergraduate students would predict a very narrow concentration of subject ages. Finally, the students had signed up for a public speaking class, which any student with a true phobia would not do, and in fact, none of the subjects rated themselves as a 10 on the initial question of public speaking fear level. The lack of external validity means that this study cannot be generalized to the larger population.
Although I thought the study was well done and internally valid, I was disappointed in the small number of subjects and their lack of diversity. I would like to see this same study done on a much larger and more diverse group of subjects. Most importantly, I would be very interested in the efficacy of REBT on those with a true phobia of public speaking, because those are the individuals who would stand to benefit the most from an effective therapy.
2004 Oct 28