Identifying active ingredients in cognitive-behavioral therapies: What if we didn't?

Abstract

Identifying active ingredients of psychological interventions is a major goal of psychotherapy researchers that is often justified by the promise that it will lead to improved patient outcomes. Much of this “active ingredients” research is conducted within randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with patient populations, putting it in Phase T2 of the clinical-translational spectrum. I argue that RCTs in patient populations are very “messy laboratories” in which to conduct active ingredient work and that T0 and T1 research provide more controlled contexts. However, I call attention to the long road from identifying active ingredients of CBTs, whether in T0, T1, or T2 research, to improving outcomes. Dissemination and implementation research (T3 and T4 approaches) may be conceptually closer to improving outcomes. Given how common and disabling mental health symptoms are, I argue that if researchers want to improve patient outcomes, these research programs must receive more attention including work on the uptake of psychological interventions as well as work on optimal ordering of existing interventions.