Relational Frame Theory (RFT)

This list includes research articles that contain original data relevant to RFT up until 2010. As the number of RFT articles has increased greatly since then, updating this list has become challenging.

Below is a list of articles that describe the relationship between RFT and ACT such as how RFT informs the ACT theory of psychopathology and intervention. Please contact the ACBS office at office@contextualscience.org if you know of additional articles that would be good to include.

This is audio from the Second World Conference on ACT, RFT, and Contextual Behavioral Science held in London, July 2006. Robert Zettle, Wichita State University Historical, conceptual, philosophical, and empirical developments beginning in the early 1980s until the present that have contributed to the emergence of ACT and RFT and their interrelationship will be presented from a participant-observer perspective. Educational Objectives:

This is audio from the Second World Conference on ACT, RFT, and Contextual Behavioral Science held in London, July 2006. Robert Zettle, Wichita State University Historical, conceptual, philosophical, and empirical developments beginning in the early 1980s until the present that have contributed to the emergence of ACT and RFT and their interrelationship will be presented from a participant-observer perspective. Educational Objectives:

This is audio from the Second World Conference on ACT, RFT, and Contextual Behavioral Science held in London, July 2006. Kelly G. Wilson, University of Mississippi Steven C. Hayes, University of Nevada, Reno Emily K. Sandoz, University of Mississippi

RFT and ACT claim parentage in the behavior analytic tradition. This is not always apparent, however, in form of the current work. Therefore, this session will explore this heritage by examining 3 classic works in behavior analysis for the roots of what has emerged as RFT and ACT.

This is audio from the Second World Conference on ACT, RFT, and Contextual Behavioral Science held in London, July 2006. Kelly G. Wilson, University of Mississippi Steven C. Hayes, University of Nevada, Reno Emily K. Sandoz, University of Mississippi

RFT and ACT claim parentage in the behavior analytic tradition. This is not always apparent, however, in form of the current work. Therefore, this session will explore this heritage by examining 3 classic works in behavior analysis for the roots of what has emerged as RFT and ACT.

Here are a number of common misunderstandings about ACT and RFT and CBS. I've listed only ones that I think are demonstrably false. Ones that could be true I have not listed since this page is about misunderstandings, not legitimate weaknesses. Comments follow each. If you know of others, let me know - Steven Hayes

There is a strong empirical and conceptual relationship between language and derived stimulus relations. An empirical relationship does not indicate that derived stimulus relations depend upon language or that such relations are mediated by language. When two dependent variables are correlated, one conservative strategy is to determine whether both variables are reflective of the same basic underlying psychological process.

Everywhere that cognizing humans go. We want a theory of human behavior that allows us truly to make a difference in our homes, schools, workplace, and clinics. The ACT / RFT community wants it all: a technology that works, a theory that works, basic principles, AND a powerful linkage to our deepest human desires. But we can distinguish aspirations from data – and we have created a culture of openness and self-criticism that seems scientifically healthy. It is often that culture which seems most powerful when people first contact the ACT and RFT community.