Skip to main content
ABCT 2025 59th Annual Convention Main banner
Psychology Tools Ad
Final Program


Icon Legend
This session is not in your schedule.
This session is in your schedule. Click again to remove it.
Presentation Icons
Recorded Session
Recorded Session
Ticketed Session
Ticketed Session
ViewAttendees 1

Symposia

Research Methods and Statistics

Advancing Idiographic Methods Toward Practice: Moving Beyond Concepts to Implementation, Feasibility, and Trial Insights

2 - (SYM 6) An Idiographic Examination of Personalized Treatment Informed by Process-based Therapy

Friday, November 21, 2025
5:27 PM - 5:48 PM CST
Location: Celestin H, Level 3
Keywords: Implementation, Treatment, Research Methods
Recommended Readings: Ong, C. W., Hayes, S. C., & Hofmann, S. G. (2022). A process-based approach to cognitive behavioral therapy: A theory-based case illustration. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1002849,   Deisenhofer, A. K., Barkham, M., Beierl, E. T., Schwartz, B., Aafjes-van Doorn, K., Beevers, C. G., Berwian, I. M., Blackwell, S. E., Bockting, C. L., Brakemeier, E. L., Brown, G., Buckman, J. E. J., Castonguay, L. G., Cusack, C. E., Dalgleish, T., de Jong, K., Delgadillo, J., DeRubeis, R. J., Driessen, E., Ehrenreich-May, J., … Cohen, Z. D. (2024). Implementing precision methods in personalizing psychological therapies: Barriers and possible ways forward. Behaviour research and therapy, 172, 104443. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2023.104443
Hofmann, S. G., & Hayes, S. C. (2019). The future of intervention science: Process-based therapy. Clinical Psychological Science, 7, 37–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 2167702618772296,   Hofmann, S. G., & Hayes, S. C. (2019). The future of intervention science: Process-based therapy. Clinical Psychological Science, 7, 37–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 2167702618772296,   Levinson, C. A., Williams, B. M., Christian, C., Hunt, R. A., Keshishian, A. C., Brosof, L. C., Vanzhula, I. A., Davis, G. G., Brown, M. L., Bridges-Curry, Z., Sandoval-Araujo, L. E., & Ralph-Nearman, C. (2023). Personalizing eating disorder treatment using idiographic models: An open series trial. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 91(1), 14–28. https://doi.org/10.1037/ccp0000785,   Woolley, M. G., Sahdra, B. K., Bowers, E. M., Capel, L. K., Twohig, M. P., & Levin, M. E. (2025). An idionomic network analysis of Trichotillomania Treatment Processes: Gathering group-level and individual-level insights to inform a personalized therapeutic framework. Behavior Therapy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2025.01.006
Abstract Body

People seeking mental health treatment present with unique concerns and contextual factors. Because empirically supported treatments often originate as protocols for randomized-controlled trials, many are designed to address the symptoms of a specific diagnosis and lack guidance about how to tailor treatment based on individual differences. However, findings indicate that individual differences impact treatment outcomes (Kent et al., 2018; Zilcha-Mano, 2021), emphasizing the importance of empirically testing tools to inform the personalization of treatment based on such differences. Process-based therapy (PBT) offers a framework to support clinicians tailoring psychotherapy to meet individual needs. The current case study examines the application of PBT and its tools like idiographic analyses and network diagrams to inform the treatment of perfectionism.
The client first completed a diagnostic assessment and selected personalized assessment items, which were tracked via ecological momentary assessment (EMA) surveys four times daily for one month, once daily during treatment, and four times daily again at post-treatment and six-months follow-up. A network diagram comprised of EMA items statistically modeled using Group Iterative Multiple Model Estimation (GIMME; Beltz & Gates, 2017) was presented to the client for feedback at the beginning of treatment. The therapist and client then collaboratively developed a network based on the original GIMME model to inform treatment planning. The client engaged in 16 sessions of PBT, and the network was then estimated again at post-treatment and follow-up to assess progress and maintenance of gains related to the personalized items. The client also completed standardized outcome measures.
The client’s personalized EMA item severity ratings decreased over the course of the study, and the network model was less dense at post-treatment and follow-up compared to baseline. Standardized measures also demonstrated improvement in psychological distress and quality of life. Clients evaluated PBT to be an acceptable treatment.
Results suggest that PBT was feasible to implement and led to similarly positive outcomes in terms of standardized and personalized measures. Diminished density of the network diagrams may indicate that treatment successfully targeted relevant processes of change. The study clinician also reported that collaborative review of the statistically modeled network diagrams at the beginning of treatment facilitated treatment planning and intervention selection.