The science of CBT: toward a metacognitive model of change?

This article supports several aspects of the arguments by Hofmann, Asmundson, and Beck (2013--this issue) about the scientific basis of cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), for example, that CBT has a strong evidence base, and that studies of the mechanisms of change are warranted. This response discusses growth within the broad field of CBT, as well as the diverse research methods that are needed to explore both clinical efficacy and treatment mechanism questions. It is suggested that the field of CBT may be approaching a shift in emphasis from cognitive to metacognitive assessment and interventions. The article concludes with a statement of general support for further development of the field of CBT.