Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 11, 2026

Applying an eMASS Customization Program as a Research Tool to Evaluate Consumer Benefits
Published on: September 27, 2019
Implications of a moderated common factors approach: does it move the field forward?
Thomas L Sexton1, Charles R Ridley
1Department of Counseling and Educational Psychology, Indiana University, 201 N. Rose Ave., Bloomington, Indiana 47405, USA. thsexton@indiana.edu
Abstract:
There are a number of similarities between the moderated common factors proposal of Sprenkle and Blow (this issue) and the multilevel, process-based therapeutic change presentation of Sexton, Ridley, and Kleiner (this issue). Despite these areas of agreement there are fundamental differences in our respective positions. We suspect that these differences are not unique to the respective authors, but instead represent the current debate in the field regarding common factors. In this commentary, we discuss what we think are important issues to have emerged from these articles. Our hope is that the issues we present below will take the debate and discussion one step further.
Related Concept Videos
Factorial Design
Fundamental Attribution Error
Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding
Confounding can be addressed at both the design phase of a study and through analytical methods after data...
Humanistic Psychology
This approach...
Cognitivism
Previously dominated by behaviorism, which prioritized observable behaviors and largely ignored mental processes, psychology transformed in the 1950s. Cognitive psychologists argue that understanding how we think and process information is...
Methods of Medium Optimization

