Symposia
Transdiagnostic
Clarissa Ong, Ph.D.
Research Scientist
Boston University
Somerville, Massachusetts
Abigail L. Barthel, M.A.
Clinical Psychology Doctoral Candidate
Boston University Center for Anxiety and Related Disorders
Allston, Massachusetts
Stefan G. Hofmann, Ph.D.
Professor
Boston University
Boston, Massachusetts
Psychological inflexibility is hypothesized to be the central source of suffering and is thus the primary treatment target in acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT). It is defined as avoidance and over-attachment to difficult thoughts and feelings in ways that hinder valued action and compromise well-being. In theory, psychological inflexibility is conceptualized as unhelpful because it affects well-being, not because it causes symptoms per se. Therefore, the objectives of the present meta-analysis were to (1) estimate the meta-correlation between psychological inflexibility, as measured by the Acceptance and Action Questionnaire (Bond et al., 2011) and its variants, and well-being (e.g., SF-36, Quality of Life Inventory); and (2) identify moderators of that relationship. We conducted a literature search in PsycINFO, PubMed, and Web of Science, resulting in 1,541 unique hits. These abstracts were screened, leaving 567 full-text articles. Of these, 192 full-text articles were included in our final sample. We will be extracting data from these articles and running meta-analytic correlation analyses to determine the strength of the relationship between psychological inflexibility and well-being across various studies. In addition, we will be examining if variables like sample type and scale used moderate this relationship. This meta-analysis will clarify the utility of psychological inflexibility as it relates to well-being, testing the core tenet on which ACT is built based on decades of empirical research.