5 - (OP25) Methodological Schism of Modern Cognitive-behavioural Therapy: Problems and Way Out

The dynamic growth of evidence-based psychotherapy has led to an enriching diversity of methods. In line with the critical observation of Hayes and Hofmann (2018), Cognitive Behavioral Therapy becoming mired in a proliferation of overlapping names and protocols leads to a harmful fragmentation of knowledge, complicates training and data integration, creates an illusion of methodological uniqueness, and ultimately hampers the progress of evidence-based practice by diverting focus from core processes of change. This fragmentation, often accompanied by in-group favoritism within therapeutic "schools" and the unjustified expansion of methods beyond their original empirical scope, undermines scientific progress, complicates training, and ultimately impedes effective client care. This presentation addresses the need for a unifying framework that can harmonize these advances while enhancing the precision, flexibility, and effectiveness of psychological interventions. We argue that the solution lies not in creating another "super-method," but in developing a shared methodological framework. Using a multi-level model, we conduct a meta-analysis of proven programs (e.g., DBT for BPD, CBT for depression, EMDR for PTSD). This analysis has enabled us to distill 12 core methodological principles that form the bedrock of effective intervention. These include: the principle of cultural and contextual adaptability, ensuring interventions are context-sensitive; the dialectical unity of acceptance and change, balancing validation with transformation; the strategic integration of cognitive and metacognitive levels of work, where the choice of focus is guided by empirical evidence of effectiveness for the specific problem-maintaining processes at hand; and the demand for transparency in the effects of psychotechniques. The proposed program-centered methodology directly addresses the pitfalls of the current schism: it mitigates divisive in-group favoritism, curbs the unjustified expansion, and provides a coherent basis for training. By focusing on modular programs tailored to specific problem-maintaining processes - whether transdiagnostic or individually unique - this framework fosters collaboration, enhances the precision and personalization of care, and steers the field's evolution toward greater scientific rigor and ethical practice. This approach offers a practical roadmap for developing future programs and consolidating the fractured landscape of modern evidence-based psychotherapy into a more unified and effective discipline.