Why CBT Dominates Sport Psychology Today
When a sport psychologist is working with a client, the interventions they use are heavily influenced by the theoretical paradigm that they align with. This paradigm is largely informed by the practitioners’ personal core beliefs and values and how they view the world, which goes on to inform the type of therapy and specific interventions they would use (Poczwardowski, 2004). As such, university degrees and post-graduate qualifications such as BPS Stage 2 and CASES SEPAR place a large emphasis on trainees learning about their own beliefs and values, in order to develop congruent philosophies that inform their practice. Across my experience through university and into training, I have noticed that one paradigm seems to dominate the field. Despite lecturers, supervisors and mentors encouraging new practitioners to explore and find a paradigm that is congruent with their beliefs, it feels like the overwhelming majority fall into one of two therapies that fall under one paradigm- Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT). In this piece, I am going to unpack the different paradigms of sport psychology and seek to understand why it is that CBT-based approaches are so dominant in today’s landscape.
Theoretical paradigms
Before diving into CBT, I thought it would first be useful to look at the other sport psychology paradigms. Goldman & Gervis (2025) provide a clear overview of these paradigms, and whilst they determined that no paradigms are fixed or universally agreed upon, came up with 7 overarching paradigms:
Psychodynamic- Developed by Sigmund Freud in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the psychodynamic approach suggests that repressed memories and desires influence behavioural and emotional states (Tarzian et al, 2023). As such, a sport psychologist adopting this approach would help their client to uncover past experiences and unconscious conflicts to foster deeper understanding and insights (Goldman & Jervis, 2025). Despite being well-known across disciplines, it is scantly used today in sport psychology.
Humanistic- The humanistic paradigm involves the understanding of the unique whole person and how people can reach a heightened sense of self through the process of self-actualisation (Dickinson et al, 2019). It is a strengths-based approach where a focus is placed existential issues like meaning, freedom and responsibility (Goldman & Gervis, 2025). This approach is usually heavily counselling focussed.
Contextual systemic- Looks to understand individuals within their broader social, cultural and relational contexts, with practitioners seeking to identify and change dysfunctional patterns within family systems to enhance communication and relationships (Goldman & Gervis, 2025).
Social justice- Focus on addressing social inequalities and promoting equity and justice (Goldman & Gervis, 2025).
Somatic- Focus on the integration of mind and body, helping clients integrate physical sensations with psychological experience using body-oriented techniques (Goldman & Gervis, 2025).
Integrative/eclectic- Combining elements from multiple approaches to tailor interventions to individual needs (Goldman & Gervis, 2025).
All of the above paradigms are used in today’s landscape to varying degrees, but in my experience, none are used as much as cognitive behavioural approaches. Within therapeutic professions in general, cognitive behavioural therapy has been termed the ‘gold standard of psychotherapy’ (David et al, 2018).
CBT can best be understood in three waves:
1st wave- behavioural therapy- First traditional psychotherapy, rejects introspective methods (such as psychoanalysis) and seeks to understand behaviour solely through measuring observable events that support predictions (Carona, 2023). Based largely on Pavlov and Skinners classical and operant conditioning principles.
2nd wave- cognitive therapy- Developed by Beck in the 1970s as an alternative to psychoanalysis. It suggests that maladaptive responses to external stressors are caused by rigid or irrational thoughts, which should be targeted in therapy (Carona, 2023). Falling within 2nd wave CBT is rational-emotive behavioural therapy (REBT), designed by Ellis, which endorsed the claim that irrational beliefs mediate the link between triggering events and psychopathological symptoms (Carona, 2023). REBT is a commonly used approach in sport psychology, where the central idea of an activating event (A) causing an irrational belief (B) is said to lead to unhelpful consequences (C) (Turner, 2016). REBT practitioners help their clients to dispute these irrational beliefs (D) and replace them with more effective rational beliefs (E).
3rd wave- acceptance-based therapy- Rooted in the 1980s but gained prominence over the last two decades, places emphasis on the context and function of psychological phenomena (Carona, 2023). It has become somewhat of an umbrella term to encompass a variety of CBT based models, including acceptance-commitment therapy (ACT), which is commonly used in the world of sport psychology today. ACT practitioners suggest that thoughts are inevitable, so rather than trying to alter them, we should accept that they are part of life and look to demonstrate committed actions that are in line with our values even when uncomfortable.
Forms of 2nd and 3rd wave approaches (predominantly REBT and ACT) dominate the field of sport psychology today; with one’s personal beliefs on whether or not thoughts can be altered largely influencing the approach that they align with.
Now we have been through a large quantity of different paradigms in the world of sport psychology- the question remains as to why it is that CBT (in its multiple forms) dominates the landscape? What is it about CBT that is so conducive to the landscape we live in today?
Practicality- Whereas psychodynamic and humanistic (and many others) perspectives seek to understand deep, inner experiences, CBT approaches focus on observable behaviours and the direct influence that thoughts have on performance. This makes these approaches more observable and easier to measure (through behaviours on the pitch, and the adoption of in the moment psychological skills such as breathing techniques and positive self-talk), which aligns them more closely with other IDT disciplines who rely heavily on performance data to inform decisions. With a rise in opportunities for psychologists to be embedded within high-performance environments, it is no surprise that approaches to practice are being adopted that are more conducive with these environments.
Time benefits- Along the same lines as the previous reason, elite sport is notoriously fast paced, with high pressure decisions and significant change occurring regularly. CBT approaches allow for theory driven, fast-paced interventions and workshops that are adaptable and can be effective in short-spaces of time. This does not take away from the importance and value of engaging in 1-on-1 support and developing tailored interventions from a CBT perspective, but it does mean that there is more adaptability which is conducive to the fast-paced environment found in elite sport.
Stigmas- Elite sport has historically encouraged having “mentally tough athletes” and a culture that rejects showing emotions. CBT approaches suggest that engaging with sports psychology and acknowledging thoughts and feelings (either reframing them or accepting them depending on which form of CBT you align with) actually leads to performance enhancement, which is the ultimate goal for a coach or athlete. Compared to other approaches, this is much more likely to gain buy in from key stakeholders in sporting environments.
The bandwagon- With a large quantity of influential sport psychologists taking a CBT approach, it becomes somewhat of a norm for neophyte trainee sport psychologists to follow in the footsteps and seek to develop as psychologists using these approaches. From my own experience, it is daunting trying to learn about different philosophies and potentially going against what I have been taught and am familiar with. For reference, on my master’s course, there were 2 lecturers (and sport psychologists) who were responsible for teaching us about approaches to practice. One was an REBT practitioner and the other an ACT practitioner. Then in my supervision group, all 5 supervisors came from either an REBT or ACT perspective. Even in the organisation I currently work in, the psychology programme is designed from an ACT perspective and made up of ACT practitioners.
Conclusion
It is clear to see that a significant reason why CBT-based approaches dominate todays landscape is their conduciveness with the demands of elite sport. So, I thought I would leave this piece with a question- as trainee sport psychologists, is it our core beliefs about how we see the world that influence the paradigm we align with, or is it instead the environments that we are exposed to during our development?
Disclaimer- It is important to say that my beliefs on this subject are based purely on my own experiences, and may differ from those of other trainee sport psychologists.
References
Carona, C. (2023). The philosophical assumptions across the ‘three waves’ of cognitive–behavioural therapy: how compatible are they?. BJPsych Advances, 29(3), 213-217.
David, D., Cristea, I., & Hofmann, S. G. (2018). Why cognitive behavioral therapy is the current gold standard of psychotherapy. Frontiers in psychiatry, 9, 333730.
Dickinson, R. K., Coulter, T. J., & Mallett, C. J. (2016). Humanistic theory in sport, performance, and sports coaching psychology.
Goldman, A., & Gervis, M. (2025). A revised approach to professional philosophy for sport and exercise psychology practitioners. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 1-22.
Poczwardowski, A., Sherman, C. P., & Ravizza, K. (2004). Professional philosophy in the sport psychology service delivery: Building on theory and practice. The Sport Psychologist, 18(4), 445-463.
Tarzian, M., Ndrio, M., & Fakoya, A. O. (2023). An introduction and brief overview of psychoanalysis. Cureus, 15(9).
