What's the scientific background for your Climb Well-being Surveys?
The well-being surveys have developed over many years of study and development from a team of Ph.D. researchers in psychology and family studies. As much as possible, individual survey questions were adapted or inspired by existing measures, including: the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D), the Oxford Happiness Inventory, the State Trait Anxiety Inventory, the Peace of Mind Scale, the State Hope Scale, the Perceived Stress Scale, the UCLA Loneliness Scale, the Self-Compassion Scale (SCS), the Relate Inventory, the Hypersexual Behavior Inventory and the OQ-45. On a broader structural level, we follow here what is called “dimensional assessment,” which aims to capture progression along a full spectrum extending from various levels of distress (depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress, physical discomfort, shame, discouragement, isolation, etc.), to their corresponding states of health (happiness, peace, healing from trauma, physical wellness, self-compassion, hope, connection, etc). This innovative approach to measurement is increasingly being embraced as the crucial next step for measurement and assessment (see the 2017 paper by 39 leading academics, “The hierarchical taxonomy of psychopathology (HiTOP): A dimensional alternative to traditional nosologies”). We were also inspired to go in this direction by popular scales such as the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) and the OECD Subjective Well-being Scale, which have measured both positive and negative experiences effectively for many years. By helping Climb members see their progress along a broader spectrum spanning negative and positive indicators, we believe this will help better document the full dimensions of a comprehensive change process, while also providing ongoing encouragement for people to continue seeking even deeper healing.
Is there a scientific background for the ClimbLifestyle Inventories?
There sure is! Each of the nine areas of lifestyle adjustments we’ve chosen to focus on (Environment, Sleep, Exercise, Nutrition, Mental Diet, Social Support, Stress, Meaning & Purpose, and Mindfulness) have been confirmed in many hundreds of studies as potentially significant influences on healing and recovery from depression and anxiety. In addition, the extra questions made available as optional assessments are drawn directly from many empirical studies we’ve personally reviewed. Bottom line: the medical research clearly documents (through different overlapping lines of observational, correlational, and controlled evidence) the value of not only paying attention to lifestyle contributors to mental health challenges, but also thinking more seriously about how to adjust these in a better direction as a way to spark more healing from these same problems.
How does your approach in Climb compare to other methods to help people find change?
The approach we take in Climb wasn't developed in a vacuum. Rather than an entirely different approach, our effort reflects an eclectic attempt to bring together anything we’ve found already proving to help deepen healing and spark more recovery from depression and anxiety. That includes aspects of behavioral activation, narrative psychology, cognitive behavioral approaches, mindfulness, and spiritual-based approaches as well. Our belief is there are many different ideas and strategies that can be helpful - and that what uniquely prompts healing for someone can vary significantly from one moment to another. If that’s true, then why not let people see the whole smorgasbord of options? Consistently, people tell us they are encouraged by very different parts of the Climb training and platform.
What’s the scientific background of the team behind Climb?
The core research members of our Climb research team have a combined 45 years of research experience—with over 65 peer-reviewed publications, and many other professional publications and books. Our broader advisory team has many other decades of research and counseling experience, with many additional scholarly publications. The experts who have informed and influenced the development of Climb include professionals from clinical and counseling psychology, family studies, and neuroscience.
What kind of research and evaluation has been done on the results and outcomes associated with apps and platforms like this one?
When you look across online tools to help people find more healing, one thing you find is most online interventions center around one strategy - with the most highly researched one, for example, online "CBT – cognitive behavioral therapy." As one researcher notes, "Despite the large number of health care apps developed so far, the majority has only simple functionality and does little more than provide information" (Becker, et al. 2014)So how does this matter for results? One central finding in an in-depth review of internet-delivered interventions promoting health behavior change in 43,236 different participants was that "interventions that incorporated more behavior change techniques tended to have larger effects than interventions that incorporated fewer techniques\" (Web, et al., 2010). As another scholar summarized, "research shows that workplace interventions are more effective when they involve evidence-based principles that offer a variety of engagement modalities" (Cancelliere, et al. 2011).Dr. Joseph Grenney, author of The Influencer, concurs: "it is not the strategies in-and-of themselves that make the difference, it is how many of the strategies you choose to employ at one time; the more strategies, the more successful the odds of changing the behavior."2012 study reviewed 3336 paid health and fitness apps in Apple's iTunes store with a focus on 3 main psychological factors that can drive behavior change, as identified by the Precede-Proceed Model (PPM). Namely, devices can be tools, mediums, or social actors. These are (1) predisposing, which increase the user’s capability; (2) enabling, which facilitates an authentic experience for users; and (3) reinforcing. These 3 factors assist the user in establishing and strengthening relationships and performing the required actions repeatedly (all three components are a part of our apps). Check out what they found:Most of the apps were coded as either predisposing or enabling with only 6.65% of apps classed as reinforcing. Only 1.86% (62/3336) of apps included all 3 factors, which may help explain why health behaviors have not shifted dramatically since the emergence of apps. (West et al., 2012)One conclusion evident in the existing research, then, is that apps that provide support in different ways, through multi-strategy approaches, have deeper impacts than those that do not.1 Fogg BJ. Persuasive Technology: Using Computers to Change What We Think and Do. In: Persuasive Technology: Using Computers to Change What We Think and Do. Waltham, MA: Morgan Kaufmann; 2002