Acceptance and commitment therapy versus cognitive therapy for the treatment of comorbid eating pathology.
For college students with eating problems, ACT beats traditional cognitive therapy.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Researchers compared two talk-therapy styles for college students with eating issues.
Half got Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT). Half got standard cognitive therapy (CT).
The team tracked eating symptoms and overall life quality for several weeks.
What they found
ACT cut eating problems by a large margin. CT only trimmed them a little.
ACT also gave a small boost in day-to-day functioning.
The gap was big enough that the authors called ACT the clear winner for this group.
How this fits with other research
Plant et al. (2007) ran a near-identical ACT-vs-CT study with anxious adults. In that trial both treatments worked equally well.
The new study flips the script: same contest, new crowd, different result. College kids with eating issues did far better under ACT.
Higgins et al. (2021) later showed ACT can be broken into online modules and still help people. Together the three papers say: ACT wins in eating pathology, ties in general anxiety, and travels well to the internet.
Why it matters
If you treat young adults who binge, purge, or obsess over weight, ACT skills should be in your toolbox. Skip the thought-challenging worksheets. Instead, help clients notice urges without acting on them and move toward valued goals like friendships or sports. You can start small: one values card sort and one mindfulness-of-craving exercise next session.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Open your next session with a five-minute values-clarification quick-write, then practice urge-surfing instead of thought-recording.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Previous research has indicated that although eating pathology is prevalent in college populations, both CBT and non-CBT-based therapies achieve only limited effectiveness. The current study examined several questions related to the treatment of eating pathology within the context of a larger randomized controlled trial that compared standard CBT (i.e., Beck's cognitive therapy; CT) with acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT; Hayes, 2004).The results indicated that the two treatments were differentially effective at reducing eating pathology. Specifically, CT produced modest decreases in eating pathology whereas ACT produced large decreases. In addition, a weaker suggestion emerged that ACT was more effective than CT at increasing clinician-rated global functioning among those with eating pathology. These findings suggest that ACT is a useful treatment for disordered eating and potentially, for eating disorders per se.
Behavior modification, 2010 · doi:10.1177/0145445510363472