Discussion: 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 challenges of using this approach with groups you may lead, as well as strategies for overcoming those challenges.

Discussion: 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 challenges of using this approach with groups you may lead, as well as strategies for overcoming those challenges.

Discussion: 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 challenges of using this approach with groups you may lead, as well as strategies for overcoming those challenges.

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 challenges of using this approach with groups you may lead, as well as strategies for overcoming those challenges.

ORDER A CUSTOMIZED, PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

Good News For Our New customers . We can write this assignment for you and pay after Delivery. Our Top -rated medical writers will comprehensively review instructions , synthesis external evidence sources(Scholarly) and customize a quality assignment for you. We will also attach a copy of plagiarism report alongside and AI report. Feel free to chat Us

Resources

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.

Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

To prepare:

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

By Day 3

Post an explanation of how the use of CBT in groups compares to its use in 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.

Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses.

By Day 6 of Week 1

Respond to at least two of your colleagues by recommending strategies to overcome the challenges your colleagues have identified. Support your recommendation with evidence-based literature and/or your own experiences with clients.

Note: For this Discussion, you are required to complete your initial post before you will be able to view and respond to your colleagues’ postings. Begin by clicking on the Reply button to complete your initial post. Remember, once you click on Post Reply, you cannot delete or edit your own posts and you cannot post anonymously. Please check your post carefully before clicking on Post Reply!

Learning Resources

Required Readings

American Psychiatric Association. (2022). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders

Links to an external site. (5th ed., text rev.). https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://dsm.psychiatryonline.org/doi/book/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425787

“Culture and Psychiatric Diagnosis”

Nichols, M., & Davis, S. D. (2020). The essentials of family therapy (7th ed.). Pearson.

Chapter 9, “Cognitive Behavioral Family Therapy”

Wheeler, K. (Ed.). (2020). Psychotherapy for the advanced practice psychiatric nurse: A how-to guide for evidence-based practice (3rd ed.). Springer Publishing.

Chapter 8, “Cognitive Behavioral Therapy”

Chapter 21, “Psychotherapeutic Approaches with Children and Adolescents”

pp. 793–802 only

Chapter 22, “Psychotherapy with Older Adults”

pp. 840–844 only

Required Media

Beck Institute for Cognitive Behavior Therapy. (2018, June 7). CBT for couples

Links to an external site. [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZH196rOGsc

MedCircle. (2019, December 13). What a cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) session looks like

Links to an external site. [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-2WQF3SWwo

PsychExamReview. (2019, April 30). Cognitive therapy, CBT, & group approaches (intro psych tutorial #241)

Links to an external site. [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2_NN1Q7Rfg

Optional Resources

Beck, A. (1994). Aaron Beck on cognitive therapy

Links to an external site. [Video file]. Mill Valley, CA: Psychotherapy.net.

Eysenck, H. (n.d.). Hans Eysenck on behavior therapy

Links to an external site. [Video file]. Mill Valley, CA: Psychotherapy.net.

Psychotherapy.net. (Producer). (2009). Rational emotive behavior therapy for addictions

Links to an external site. [Video file]. Psychotherapy.net: Author.

Sommers-Flanagan, J., & Sommers-Flanagan, R. (2013). Counseling and psychotherapy theories in context and practice

Links to an external site. [Video]. https://waldenu.kanopy.com/video/counseling-and-psychotherapy-theories-contex

CBT (starts at 2 hours 27 minutes)

NRNP_6645_Week5_Discussion_Rubric

NRNP_6645_Week5_Discussion_Rubric

Criteria Ratings Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Main Posting:Response to the discussion question is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.

44 to >39.0 pts

Excellent Point range: 90–100

Thoroughly responds to the discussion question(s)…. Is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources…. No less than 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth…. Supported by at least 3 current credible sources.

39 to >34.0 pts

Good Point range: 80–89

Responds to most of the discussion question(s)…. Is somewhat reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module…. 50% of the post has exceptional depth and breadth…. Supported by at least 3 credible references.

34 to >30.0 pts

Fair Point range: 70–79

Responds to some of the discussion question(s)…. One to two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed…. Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis…. Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module…. Post is cited with fewer than 2 credible references.

30 to >0 pts

Poor Point range: 0–69

Does not respond to the discussion question(s)…. Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria…. Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis…. Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module…. Contains only 1 or no credible references.

44 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Main Posting:Writing

6 to >5.0 pts

Excellent Point range: 90–100

Written clearly and concisely…. Contains no grammatical or spelling errors…. Further adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

5 to >4.0 pts

Good Point range: 80–89

Written concisely…. May contain one to two grammatical or spelling errors…. Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

4 to >3.0 pts

Fair Point range: 70–79

Written somewhat concisely…. May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors…. Contains some APA formatting errors.

3 to >0 pts

Poor Point range: 0–69

Not written clearly or concisely…. Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors…. Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.
6 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Main Posting:Timely and full participation
10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent Point range: 90–100

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation…. Posts main discussion by due date.

8 to >7.0 pts

Good Point range: 80–89

Posts main discussion by due date…. Meets requirements for full participation.

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair Point range: 70–79

Posts main discussion by due date.

6 to >0 pts

Poor Point range: 0–69

Does not meet requirements for full participation…. Does not post main discussion by due date.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome First Response:Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.
9 to >8.0 pts

Excellent Point range: 90–100

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings…. Responds to questions posed by faculty…. The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

8 to >7.0 pts

Good Point range: 80–89

Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair Point range: 70–79

Response is on topic, may have some depth.

6 to >0 pts

Poor Point range: 0–69

Response may not be on topic, lacks depth.
9 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome First Response:Writing
6 to >5.0 pts

Excellent Point range: 90–100

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues…. Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed…. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources…. Response is effectively written in Standard, Edited English.

5 to >4.0 pts

Good Point range: 80–89

Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues…. Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed…. Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources…. Response is written in Standard, Edited English.

4 to >3.0 pts

Fair Point range: 70–79

Response posed in the discussion may lack effective professional communication…. Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed…. Few or no credible sources are cited.

3 to >0 pts

Poor Point range: 0–69

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective communication…. Response to faculty questions are missing…. No credible sources are cited.
6 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome First Response:Timely and full participation

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent Point range: 90–100

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation…. Posts by due date.

4 to >3.0 pts

Good Point range: 80–89

Meets requirements for full participation…. Posts by due date.

3 to >2.0 pts

Fair Point range: 70–79

Posts by due date.

2 to >0 pts

Poor Point range: 0–69

Does not meet requirements for full participation…. Does not post by due date.
5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Second Response:Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.

9 to >8.0 pts

Excellent Point range: 90–100

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings…. Responds to questions posed by faculty…. The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

8 to >7.0 pts

Good Point range: 80–89

Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair Point range: 70–79

Response is on topic, may have some depth.

6 to >0 pts

Poor Point range: 0–69

Response may not be on topic, lacks depth.
9 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Second Response:Writing

6 to >5.0 pts

Excellent Point range: 90–100

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues…. Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed…. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources…. Response is effectively written in Standard, Edited English.

5 to >4.0 pts

Good Point range: 80–89

Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues…. Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed…. Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources…. Response is written in Standard, Edited English.

4 to >3.0 pts

Fair Point range: 70–79

Response posed in the discussion may lack effective professional communication…. Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed…. Few or no credible sources are cited.

3 to >0 pts

Poor Point range: 0–69

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective communication…. Response to faculty questions are missing…. No credible sources are cited.

6 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Second Response:Timely and full participation
5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent Point range: 90–100

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation…. Posts by due date.

4 to >3.0 pts

Good Point range: 80–89

Meets requirements for full participation…. Posts by due date.

3 to >2.0 pts

Fair Point range: 70–79

Posts by due date.

2 to >0 pts

Poor Point range: 0–69

Does not meet requirements for full participation…. Does not post by due date.
5 pts

Total Points: 100