efines the problem, establishesgoals, designs an intervention, assigns a strategic task, emphasizes positive new behavior changes,and then before termination, helps clients gradually incorporate new behaviors into their everydayliving. (Nugent). This is very directive. The main reason I like this approach is because it clearlyfulfills the criterium mentioned earlier for effective time-limited interventions, and like all cognitive-behavioral approaches it is psychoeducational, structured, and focuses on specific target problems(Nugent). Although it can be especially effective in dealing with most normal developmental andacademic issues, it is not a panacea, and may not be as effective in dealing with more intrapsychiclong-term presenting problems, where I would prefer a more psychodynamic or humanistic approach,but it will probably help most of the client populations (college students) presenting problems mostof the time.The limitations of this specific approach are the same as those for all cognitive-behavioralmodels. Cognitive therapy has been criticized as focusing too much on the power of positivethinking; as being too superficial and simplistic; as denying the importance of the clients past; asbeing too technique-oriented; as failing to use the therapeutic relationship; as working only oneliminating symptoms, but failing to explore the underlying causes of difficulties; as ignoring therole of unconscious factors; and neglecting the role of feelings. (Corey, 1996 p.356). Also, becausethe underlying premise/techniques of all cognitive-behavioral therapy is challenging the clientsbeliefs/values and behaviors, this has potentially harmful implications for culturally diversepopulations/clients. It is especially important that the counselor make himself aware of the culturalcontext and values of these clients before attempting to confront or change their way of thinking orbehavior (Corey).When dealing with clients that have issues th...
