Toolkit

The ideas behind it

Where these tools come from, in plain language.

Values first

Every tool on this site starts from values, and values clarification has support far beyond any one school of therapy. Naming what matters to you and noticing the gap between that and how you’re living is one of the most reliable ways to change what you do next. What Matters, the card sort, was designed by Dr. Martine J. RoBards, a neuropsychologist, and rebuilt for the web by her son, Michael RoBards, LCSW. It ranks your values and asks whether each one is satisfied, which is the same logic clinicians use in the Valued Living Questionnaire.

What ACT is

The three tools that follow borrow their bones from Acceptance and Commitment Therapy, usually said as one word: ACT. ACT is a form of behavioral therapy developed in the 1980s by Steven Hayes and colleagues, with several hundred clinical trials behind it and a place on most lists of evidence-based treatments. Its central idea is simple and a little unfashionable: a full life includes pain, and a great deal of our suffering comes from the fight to avoid it. Instead of trying to feel better first and live later, ACT works on psychological flexibility: the ability to be present, open up to what you feel, and do what matters to you, even with the hard stuff along for the ride.

The six skills

ACT describes that flexibility as six skills. They’re the six sides of the shape Flex draws.

Making roomUnhookingBeing hereThe watcherValuesAction

How the tools map on

What Matters is the values skill, done with cards instead of a worksheet. Bull’s Eye is doing what matters, kept honest by a calendar; it adapts the Bull’s Eye Values Survey (Lundgren and colleagues, 2012), a standard ACT instrument. The Matrix is making room and unhooking, applied to the real moves you make when something hurts; it follows Polk and Schoendorff’s ACT Matrix. Flex is the whole picture, six skills on one shape.

Why repeat a questionnaire

The check-ins are ordinary clinical questionnaires: the PHQ-9 for mood, the GAD-7 for anxiety, and the rest. One score is a snapshot. Clinicians who have clients repeat a couple of these between sessions, and look at the line together, get better outcomes than clinicians who guess; the research calls it measurement-based care, and almost nobody does it because the tools are clunky. Here they take two minutes, remind you weekly if you ask, and draw the line with the published cutoffs on it. A score is never a diagnosis. A line that has moved is worth a conversation.

What this can and can’t claim

ACT is well studied. The questionnaires are validated and scored exactly as published. The four card-based tools are built on those methods and have not been tested themselves. None of this is therapy, and it can’t see who you are. If it makes you want the real thing, that is a fine outcome. More on what this is and isn’t, and what we keep. For therapists.