Gunter and Whittal (2010) set out to identify whether cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) was any more or less efficacious than other alternate treatment regimens for anxiety disorders. This was largely a qualitative study since its core elemental focus was efficiency, as determined through the observation of participants.
The researchers wanted to identify why, despite CBT being heralded as an exceedingly efficient tool of treatment, populations suffering from anxiety disorders still did not have adequate access to this treatment plan. In essence, they had to observe psychological practitioners in order to see which treatment plans they used on their patients.
In addition to determining the actual range of treatment plans used by therapists, Gunter and Whittal (2010) wanted to identify any potential hurdles encountered by those using CBT. This would serve to highlight the reason behind the salient underutilization of CBT as a method of treatment among psychologists, despite its success rate. Their research described the above discrepancy as hindering practitioners from fully tapping into CBT’s potential. In order to understand the cause of this inconsistency, they used an interpretive technique of data analysis whereby they documented their own impressions and then gave their recommendations.