Derek Joyce Burwell, R., & Chen, C. (2002). Applying REBT to workaholic clients.

Counseling Psychology Quarterly, 15(3), 219-228. The characteristics of workaholism are individuals who take on a lot of responsibility, rarely delegate work to others, refuse to take days off, and even when they do, they bring work with them. However, these individuals are often inefficient and ineffective for their companies, however, due to the tendency for perfectionism. The most detrimental thing to the productivity of the workaholic, and to their health, are health problems such as stressed-induced illness, chronic fatigue, high anxiety, and substance abuse. Previous authors suggested that workaholism may be associated from an addiction, an escape from outside issues,, a need for control in ones life, or impaired self-esteem. This article focused on the last definition, suggesting that use of the ABCDE model could be used to monitor attributing factors to the individuals ideology and as a basis to find alternative ways to increase self-image. Questioning and cognitive reframing are cited as effective strategies for intervention, citing specific irrational beliefs that a workaholic may use, such as if I delegate my work, it wont get done properly, and if my boss gives me a bad performance appraisal then Ill know for sure that Im in the wrong field of work. The second form of intervention would be through emotive intervention. Shame-attacking exercises, the intentional performance of an activity that may result in disapproval from others. This would result in a form of desensitization in preparation that such disapproval may occur, or ideally help the individual realize that the behavior may not necessarily lead to disapproval. Finally, the client would be challenged to act in ways that would oppose the current beliefs and support the newly developed rational beliefs. While the theory appears sound, the article provides no studies or statistics from which to support its claims.

Derek Joyce Kahn, B. B., & Kahn, W. J. (2001). Is REBT marginalized?: A survey of counselor educators. Journal Of Rational-Emotive & Cognitive Behavior Therapy, 19(1), 5-19. doi:10.1023/A:1007839131730. This article considers many of the reasons why REBT is not considered one of the central approaches to counseling. The main concerns are ambiguity within the theory, ambiguity in application, and a lack of empirical research. While Ellis revised from his original theory to include definitions of emotional health, ego disturbance, and low frustration tolerance, and how thoughts, emotions, and behavior interrelate, there is still need for a clarification of the definition of irrational beliefs and the paths of irrational beliefs from the core irrational beliefs. REBT also lacks a theory for personal development, does not have consideration for cultural diversity, and has been criticized for lacking warmth, sabotaging change, and possibly promoting attribution. Part of why there is a lack of empirical evidence is because of ambiguity of terminology and difficulty in testing certain hypotheses. The author then conducts a survey of two practitioners opinions concerning The survey questioned participants on their theoretical orientation of choice, what factors were part of that decision, whether the participant taught REBT in their classes, and again what factors contributed to that. The results concluded that while only 11% of participants stated that REBT was their preferred theory, approximately 70% of participants stated that REBT influenced their orientation. Additionally, over 80% of participants stated that they taught REBT. According to this data, the main objection to REBT in practice is deficiencies in application. However, there is no marginalization in teaching. The author finally suggested five hypotheses for how to improve the acceptance of REBT in practice.