Disputing, and then debating between rational and irrational beliefs, aims at destroying, or at least minimize, the child’s irrational beliefs. An effective disputation procedure includes the following steps (Seligman, Reivich, Jaycox, and Gillham, 1995):
Step 1: Evidence gathering, looking for both the evidence that supports the belief and the evidence that counts against the belief.
Step 2: Generating alternatives or other ways to see the event.
Step 3: Perspective taking by thinking of how other people will see what happened; for example, an impartial observer, best friend, or parent.
Step 4: Decatastrophizing by accurately evaluating the implications and the what ifs of the experience. The authors advise children to find:
---4A: The worst possible thing that could happen: How likely is it? What the child can do to help stop it happen? What the child can do to improve the situation?
---4B: The best possible thing: What the child can do to help make it happen?
---4C: The most likely outcome.
Step 5: Developing a plan for the most likely outcome, but the child should plan for the best and worst possible outcomes too. What specific actions the student can take to improve the situation?
Seligman et al. train children in disputation using the following outline:
Step 1: Evidence gathering: What is the evidence for my belief?
Step 2: Generating alternatives: What are other ways of seeing this problem?
Step 3: Perspective taking: How my best friend will see it? My father? Spiderman?
Step 4: Decatastrophizing by accurately evaluating the implications using "what ifs." The student defines the best and worst possible outcomes; also identifies the most likely outcome.
Step 5: Developing a plan for each:
---5A: Worst thing that could happen
---5B: Best thing that could happen
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar