1996), the Youth Self Report (Achenbach, 1991),
and the Marital Conflict Form (Weiss & Margolin,
1977).
Notably absent from this brief and partial list-
ing of inventories are instruments that have a psy-
chiatric diagnostic orientation. Historically, this has
been a conscious omission on the part of behavioral
assessors, who generally found little merit in psy-
chiatric classification (e.g., see Follette & Hayes,
1992). Tests used by behavior therapists were
more oriented toward the assessment of specific
behavioral deficits, behavioral inappropriateness,
and behavioral assets (Sundberg, 1977). The focus
of behavioral inventories is, in short, behavior. Cli-
ents are asked about specific actions, feelings, or
thoughts that minimize the necessity for them to
make inferences about what their own behavior
really means.
Cognitive-Behavioral Assessment
As we shall see in later chapters, behavioral
approaches have become increasingly cognitively
oriented (Goldfried & Davison, 1994; Meichen-
baum, 1977). Cognitions along with behaviors are
becoming the subject of intense study as they relate
to the development of a pathological situation, its
maintenance, and changes in it. Central to this type
ofcognitive-behavioral assessmentis the notion that the
client’s cognitions and thoughts (from self-images
to self-statements) play an important role in behav-
ior (Brewin, 1988). Indeed, Meichenbaum (1977)
advocates acognitive-functional approach. In essence,
this means that a functional analysis of the client’s
thinking processes must be made to plan an inter-
vention strategy. A careful inventory of cognitive
strategies must be undertaken to determine which
cognitions (or lack of them) are aiding or interfering
with adequate performance and under what
circumstances.
As Parks and Hollon (1988) note, a number of
methods and procedures are available for assessing
cognitive functioning. For example, clients can be
instructed to“think aloud,”or verbalize immediate
thoughts; they can report their thoughts and feel-
ings in reaction to recorded conversations of various
types (e.g., stressful, social-evaluative situations);
they can complete rating scales whose items target
adaptive and maladaptive cognitions that may have
occurred in the past; and they can list thoughts that
occur in reaction to specific stimuli (e.g., topics or
problems) that are presented.
A good example comes from work in which
a task analysis of assertive behavior was made
(Schwartz & Gottman, 1976). Cognitive self-
statements as they relate to assertion situations were
assessed by means of the Assertiveness Self-Statement
Test (ASST). This is a 34-item questionnaire, with
17 positive self-statements that would make it easier
to refuse a request and 17 negative self-statements
that would make it harder. For example:
Positive: I was thinking that I am perfectly free
to say no; I was thinking that this request is
an unreasonable one.
Negative: I was worried about what the other
person would think of me if I refused;
I was thinking that the other person might
be hurt or insulted if I refused. (Schwartz
& Gottman, 1976, p. 913)
Through such assessment, it becomes clearer
exactly what role is being played by self-
statements in the maintenance of problems such as
lack of assertiveness.
Similar procedures can be applied to such
problems as overeating, depression, and shyness.
For example, to assess agoraphobics’fear of fear,
Chambless, Caputo, Bright, and Gallagher (1984)
have developed a scale comprising thoughts about
negative consequences as one experiences anxiety.
Another example of cognitive assessment comes
from the work of Seligman et al. (1988). Using
the Attributional Style Questionnaire, they found
that healthier explanations for events occurred in
depressive patients following a course of cognitive
therapy.
More recently, Turner, Beidel, Heiser, Johnson,
and Lydiard (2003) developed a self-report measure
to assess cognitions associated with social phobia, the
Social Thoughts and Beliefs Scale (STABS). SocialBEHAVIORAL ASSESSMENT 275