| Summary: | Insomnia is a widespread disorder which has significant negative repercussions on a person’s physical health, mental health, productivity and economic wellbeing. As pharmacological interventions cause significant adverse side-effects, considerable effort was made in developing better non pharmacological interventions in the form of therapy. The current recommended model is Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT). CBT, as described by the literature on emotional regulation, can be seen as antecedent focused whereby negative emotions are controlled and changed in order to avert the negative consequences. Whilst CBT has shown efficacy, its effects are not necessarily long lasting since adherence levels to interventions drop significantly within 12 months. As CBT also has smaller effect sizes in treating insomnia compared to other disorders, Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) is explored in the current study to see if there can be justification in utilising ACT in the treatment of insomnia. Whilst CBT is antecedent focused, ACT is response focused, whereby interventions aim to reduce suppression of negative emotions and to focus on living a life towards self defined meaningful values. The current study utilised data from a survey of 327 participants to explore whether there was support in utilising ACT in the treatment of insomnia. The overall findings provided the support for further research into the ACT model in the treatment of insomnia. Through multiple regression, linear regression and mediation analyses, it was found that the six processes known as acceptance, cognitive defusion, being present, self as context, values and committed actions predicted experiential avoidance, it was also found that experiential avoidance was predictive of sleep quality and that experiential avoidance mediated the relationship between anxiety sensitivity and sleep quality. A hierarchical regression analysis however, found that sociability did not add to the predictive power of experiential avoidance on sleep quality. Methodological limitations are discussed together with their implications for future research.
|
|---|
