Theoretical overlap and distinction between rational emotive behavior therapy’s awfulizing and cognitive therapy’s catastrophizing

The term catastrophizing was coined by Ellis (1962) and commented on by Beck (1979). Since that time, much research has been done on the topic and a recent review article postulated that catastrophizing served as a transdiagnostic mechanism across the psychiatric disorders (Gellatly and Beck, 2016). In rational emotive behavior therapy (REBT), there is a greater emphasis placed on the underlying irrational beliefs than the surface-level automatic thoughts; therefore, REBT therapists tend to focus on Awfulizing as opposed to catastrophizing. While these terms sound similar, it is unclear what theoretical overlap and distinction exists between the concepts. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

This paper is a review and synthesis of the extant literature, drawing from both theorists and empirical studies, to map out the similar and unique aspects of each cognition.

Awfulizing and catastrophizing are distinct concepts with differing effects on cognitive, affective and behavioral responses; these findings extend beyond theoretical models and are supported by empirical literature.

This review has direct implications for practitioners of the cognitive and behavioral therapies, including REBT, and those seeking an integration of the cognitive therapies.