Article Review
This paper presents a review of an article authored by Arcch et al. (2012). The paper presents a brief summary and evaluation of the article. The following is the article reviewed in this paper:
Arch, J. J., Eifert, G. H., Davies, C., Vilardaga, J. C. P., Rose, R. D. & Craske, M. G . (2012).
Randomized clinical trial of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) versus acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) for mixed anxiety disorders. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 80(5), 750-765.
Summary of the Article
The above article presents a study that aimed at determining the effectiveness of acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) in treating mixed anxiety disorders. According to Arch et al. (2012), anxiety disorder describes chronic or long-lasting anxiety that is not focused on a specific situation or object. According to Arch et al. (2012), anxiety is one of the normal experiences of human beings but prolonged anxiety may have severe impacts on the normal functioning of the brain and other parts of the body. In some cases, prolonged anxiety may be a cause of early death. Arch et al. (2012) explain, anxiety disorders are effectively treated using cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT). However, the authors note that there are no enough randomized studies that have assessed the effectiveness of the ACT in treating Anxiety. Thus, the authors focus on bridging that gap. In order to achieve this, the researchers carried out a study that involved comparing the effectiveness of ACT with CBT. The study was carried out on 128 individuals with different types of anxiety disorders within a period of 6 to 12 months. The results of the findings indicated that ACT is as effective as CBT in treating mixed anxiety disorders (Arch et al., 2012).
Article Evaluation
The article written by Arch et al. (2012) is not a simple informational article; it presents a summary of an extensive research carried out by the authors. In the article, Arch et al. (2012) offer a clear and precise explanation of the research that they carried out. The researchers explain all the steps that they used to conduct their research. For instance, the researchers started by exploring the results of the previous studies. The review of the previous researchers enabled the researchers to determine whether there was a research gap, to be filled or not. Further, Arch et al. (2012) offer clear explanations of the methodology they used to collect data and the type of data they collected. In addition, Arch et al. (2012) explain how they analyzed the results of the study and ultimately present the findings they derived from the study.
The research article authored by Arch et al. (2012) has an important implication to the students of psychology. The content of the article offers students of psychology with knowledge of anxiety disorders. It also gives them a hint on the impact of the disorders. Importantly, the study offers valuable knowledge to the students on why and how they should apply ACT strategy, alongside CBT strategy, in the treatment of anxiety disorders. The study is also relevant to the public since it gives a recommendation for the use of ACT in treating anxiety among the members of the public.
I can improve the article further through focusing on demographical variables such as gender and race during the analysis of the findings and avoid taking a general approach. My approach would help to discern whether the effectiveness of ACT varies depending on demographic factors. I am inspired to read the article since it focuses on anxiety, which is an issue that is present and prevalent in the society. I would like to know more about other effective ways of treating anxiety, especially with little or no intervention from health professionals.
References
Arch, J. J., Eifert, G. H., Davies, C., Vilardaga, J. C. P., Rose, R. D. & Craske, M. G . (2012).
Randomized clinical trial of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) versus acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) for mixed anxiety disorders. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 80(5), 750-765