orders@superbacademics.com
+1 914 979 2828
+1 914 979 2828

Significant differences in the applications of cognitive behavior therapy (CBT)

 

There are significant differences in the applications of cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) for families and individuals. The same is true for CBT in group settings and CBT in family settings. In your role, it is essential to understand these differences to appropriately apply this therapeutic approach across multiple settings. For this Discussion, as you compare the use of CBT in individual, group, and family settings, consider the challenges of using this approach with groups you may lead, as well as strategies for overcoming those challenges.

To prepare:

Review the videos in this week’s Learning Resources and consider the insights provided on CBT in various settings.

THE QUESTION

· Post an explanation of how the use of CBT in groups compares to its use in the family or individual settings.

· Explain at least two challenges PMHNPs might encounter when using CBT in one of these settings.

· Support your response with specific examples from this week’s media and at least three peer-reviewed, evidence-based sources.

· Explain why each of your supporting sources is considered scholarly and attach the PDFs of your sources.

 

Sample Solution

Brian Cheffins analyses the history of corporate governance and made the following observation:
Following World War 2, it was implicitly assumed that the US managerial corporation characterised by executive dominance in a context of dispersed ownership was the pinnacle in the evolution of organisational norms, and the dominance of this model as exemplified by US global corporate success meant corporate governance arrangements in other countries that differed were largely ignored.

The US economy however dipped in the 1990s and perceptions also changed. There was competition from Japan and Germany and their governance systems were also acknowledged as competitive. There was a criticism to the US managerial system along the line that their executives focused on short term results at the expense of long term plans merely to avert the threat of takeovers. The problems associated with this approach were non-existent in the German and Japanese systems. There were some who even suggested that the US could benefit from adopting, in a modified form, some elements from these countries` system.
When the US economy took a rebound in the mid 1990s, and the German and Japanese economies suffered, the Anglo American model was hailed as the optimal one again. Weaknesses were identified in corporate governance systems arising from family control of major publicly traded companies. These were cited as contributing towards the Asian stock market crash of 1997 and led to calls for reforms aimed at protecting minority shareholders.