Social Anxiety Disorder Comedic Improv Therapy for the ... Improv Therapy for the Treatme… · tend: “When we are fiercely following the elements of improvisation, we generate

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=wcmh20

Download by: [University of Northern Colorado] Date: 22 June 2016, At: 12:00

Journal of Creativity in Mental Health

ISSN: 1540-1383 (Print) 1540-1391 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wcmh20

Comedic Improv Therapy for the Treatment ofSocial Anxiety Disorder

Alison Phillips Sheesley, Mark Pfeffer & Becca Barish

To cite this article: Alison Phillips Sheesley, Mark Pfeffer & Becca Barish (2016) ComedicImprov Therapy for the Treatment of Social Anxiety Disorder, Journal of Creativity in MentalHealth, 11:2, 157-169, DOI: 10.1080/15401383.2016.1182880

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15401383.2016.1182880

Published online: 13 Jun 2016.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 8

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Comedic Improv Therapy for the Treatment of SocialAnxiety DisorderAlison Phillips Sheesley a, Mark Pfefferb,c, and Becca Barishd

aUniversity of Northern Colorado, Greeley, Colorado, USA; bPanic/Anxiety/Recovery Center (PARC),Chicago, Illinois, USA; cThe Second City Training Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA; dThe Wellness Programat The Second City Training Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA

ABSTRACTComedic improv therapy, a group therapy model inspired bythe practice of improv comedy, provides a novel treatment forsocial anxiety disorder by harnessing the following therapeuticelements: (a) group cohesiveness, (b) play, (c) exposure, and (d)humor. This article outlines the theoretical basis for this crea-tive treatment and discusses important considerations for thepractical application of this mode of therapy, such as thecombination of comedic improv therapy with other modes oftherapy. Lastly, this article describes an existing clinical pro-gram called Improv for Anxiety that integrates comedic improvtherapy with group cognitive behavioral therapy for the treat-ment of social anxiety disorder.

KEYWORDSComedic improv therapy;creative arts; creativity incounseling; expressive arts;group counseling; grouptherapy; improv comedy;play therapy; psychodrama;social anxiety disorder

The hallmark of social anxiety disorder (SAD) is “marked fear or anxiety aboutone or more social situations in which the individual is exposed to possiblescrutiny by others” (American Psychiatric Association, 2013, p. 202). Comedicimprov therapy (CIT) is a novel approach for the treatment of SADderived fromimprovisational comedy (i.e., improv comedy). The practice of improv comedyexposes participants to potentially anxiety-producing scenarios where theatricalperformance without a script is demanded. Under the guidance of one or moreskilled mental health professionals, participation in CIT could provide a correc-tive emotional experience for individuals experiencing SAD. Using the curativeelements of (a) group cohesiveness, (b) play, (c) exposure, and (d) humor, CIToffers an innovative group therapy model for the treatment of SAD.

SAD

SAD is a common, though often untreated, mental health issue (Weiller,Bisserbe, Boyer, Lepine, & Lecrubier, 1996). According to the NationalComorbidity Survey-Replication, SAD has a lifetime prevalence of 12.1%,which is among the highest of all anxiety disorders (Kessler, Chiu,

CONTACT Alison Phillips Sheesley [email protected] Department of Applied Psychology andCounselor Education, Campus Box 131, University of Northern Colorado, Greeley, CO 80639, USA.

JOURNAL OF CREATIVITY IN MENTAL HEALTH2016, VOL. 11, NO. 2, 157–169http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15401383.2016.1182880

© 2016 Taylor & Francis

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

ern

Col

orad

o] a

t 12:

00 2

2 Ju

ne 2

016

Demler, & Walters, 2005). For adolescents with SAD, frequent lonelinessand avoidance of social situations are reported, such as “asking a teacher aquestion,” “walking in the hallways,” and “dating” (Mesa, Beidel, &Bunnell, 2014, p. 1). For adults, SAD is associated with lower quality oflife and reduced income earnings (Andlin-Sobocki, Jönsson, Wittchen, &Olesen, 2005). Given these negative repercussions, effective treatment isimportant to improve the outcome and life satisfaction of individualsexperiencing SAD.

Most published studies examining the efficacy of treatment for SADfocus on cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and group cognitive beha-vioral therapy (GCBT). A recent meta-analysis by Wersebe, Sijbrandij, andCuijpers (2013) concluded that GCBT offers a “moderate, but significanteffect in the treatment of SAD compared to control” (p. 3). The treatmentmechanism of GCBT is exposure to feared social stimuli with opportunityfor processing and cognitive restructuring led by the group therapists. Thegroup dynamic presumably exposes a client to more feared social stimulithan a counselor–client dynamic alone. Yet a study by Eng, Coles,Heimberg, and Safren (2001) showed that 36% of clients with SAD were“nonresponders” to GCBT. Similarly, Kashdan and Steger (2006) concludedthat current interventions for SAD, such as CBT, “may not be sufficient toenhance appetitive goals and activities and positive emotions” because theprimary focus is altering negative cognitions (p. 126). GCBT can be com-bined with CIT, which may reduce the percentage of “nonresponders” byvirtue of emphasizing “positive emotions” such as laughter described laterin this article.

Background of improv comedy

Improv (i.e., improv comedy or improvisational theater) refers to any thea-trical performance occurring without a script. Mick Napier, Director andArtistic Consultant at The Second City and Founder and Artistic Director atThe Annoyance Theatre in Chicago, defines improv comedy as “the art of notknowing what the hell you’re going to do or say and being completely okaywith that” (ChicagoIdeasWeek, 2012). Improv comedy, Trew and Nelson(2013) added, “has the ability to surprise and move even the most experi-enced improviser/audience” (p. i). Most improv comedy takes place ingroups of individual players, also known as “teams,” who practice regularly.

The roots of modern improv comedy can be traced from commediadell’arte in 15th-century Italy to America in the late 1930s when ViolaSpolin, as a means of engaging children in community theater, developedmany of the quintessential improv exercises still used today (Salinsky &Frances-White, 2008). For example, to inspire the improvised performance,

158 A. PHILLIPS SHEESLEY ET AL.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

ern

Col

orad

o] a

t 12:

00 2

2 Ju

ne 2

016

Spolin would first ask for “a suggestion from the audience” (Salinsky &Frances-White, 2008, p. 3). As the discipline of improv comedy evolved,two major institutions were established: The Second City (founded byBernard Sahlins, Howard Alk, & Paul Sills, son of Viola Spolin) andImprovOlympic (founded by Del Close & Charna Halpern; Salinsky &Frances-White, 2008).

One of the most commonly used improv exercises is called, “Yes, and . . .,”an exercise intended to strengthen the skills and relationships among teammembers. Two improvisers stand or sit facing each other. The first impro-viser starts with a premise, a single statement as simple or complicated asdesired (e.g., “The sky is blue”). The second improviser responds with “Yes,and . . .,” adding to the premise (e.g., “Yes, and there is a cloud in the sky thatlooks like an elephant”). In turn, each improviser continues to respond to theother with “Yes, and . . .,” building on each other’s ideas. The crucial compo-nent of this exercise as explained by Salinsky and Frances-White (2008) is theabsence of rejection: “Saying yes to your partner’s idea represents a risk. Youhave to let an alien idea in and, if you have to build on it, you have to let itinfluence you” (p. 61).

Interest in improv comedy has recently expanded beyond comedic enter-tainment; the psychological, intellectual, relational, social, and even economicbenefits of practicing improv comedy appear vast. Writing about the applica-tion of improv comedy in the workplace, Leonard and Yorton (2015) con-tend: “When we are fiercely following the elements of improvisation, wegenerate ideas both quickly and efficiently; we’re more engaged with ourcoworkers; our interactions with clients become richer . . . we don’t workburdened by a fear of failure” (p. 1). Patricia Ryan Madson, an improvconsultant to organizations, agrees: “[E]xecutives and engineers and peoplein transition are looking for support in saying yes to their own voice. Often,the systems we put in place to keep us secure are keeping us from our morecreative selves” (Rae-Dupree, 2008, p. 10).

Because improv comedy by its very nature appears to create opportunitiesfor personal growth and exploration, this framework can be adapted by askilled mental health professional in the context of group therapy for thetreatment of psychological issues, such as SAD. As explained cogently bySteitzer (2011), who recognized the benefits of applying improv comedy inthe context of social work groups and first published seminal academicliterature on this topic, the advantages of practicing improv comedy include“active listening,” “risk-taking,” and “group-mind.” In this article, we offer anoriginal approach for the treatment of SAD more closely aligned withcounseling theory and research and label this theoretical model comedicimprov therapy (CIT). This article also explains how to implement specificCIT exercises and combine CIT with other therapy models, such as GCBT, ascurrently applied in our clinical practice for the treatment of SAD.

JOURNAL OF CREATIVITY IN MENTAL HEALTH 159

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

ern

Col

orad

o] a

t 12:

00 2

2 Ju

ne 2

016

CIT: Theoretical treatment mechanisms and examples of exercises

CIT integrates several healing elements from multiple modalities of therapyto potentially provide effective treatment for clients with SAD: (a) groupcohesiveness, (b) play, (c) exposure, and (d) humor. Below, a description ofspecific improv comedy exercises to be utilized by the group therapy leaderfollows a discussion of each element. Although this article outlines specificexercises, with further improv comedy training, mental health professionalsalso can support the creation of fully developed scenes involving morecomplex characters and storylines.

Group cohesiveness

Group cohesiveness is arguably the most vital component of CIT and equallyessential to the practice of improv comedy. Irvin Yalom (2005), in hisgroundbreaking work The Theory and Practice of Group Psychotherapy,defined group cohesiveness as “the individual’s relationship to the grouptherapist, to the other group members, and to the group as a whole”(p. 54). Group cohesiveness is essential in the context of group therapy forthe treatment of SAD because individuals with SAD often view themselves asunacceptable to others and believe that their own behaviors will lead tohumiliation and rejection (Kashdan & Steger, 2006). The therapeuticmechanism underlying group cohesiveness lies in the acceptance of others:“To be accepted by others challenges the client’s belief that he or she isbasically repugnant, unacceptable, or unlovable” (Yalom, 2005, p. 56).Moreover, Kashdan and Steger (2006) suggested that treatments for SADshould focus on “facilitating an accepting, nonjudgmental stance” towardsfeelings of social anxiety (p. 126).

CIT attempts to create a social environment wherein individual groupmembers experience feelings of group cohesiveness while confronting feel-ings of social anxiety. When guided by a sensitive and experienced groupfacilitator, this therapeutic model could serve to alleviate symptoms of SAD.The following improv comedy exercise can be used to strengthen groupcohesiveness within the framework of CIT for the treatment of SAD.

“I’m a . . .”In this universally known improv exercise, group members begin by standingin a line. One person selected by the group leader steps out and announces“I’m a . . .,” completing the sentence with an example of an object. The groupmember also uses his/her body to act out the object. For example, a groupmember declares, “I’m a tree” and puts his hands up and sways gently. Oneby one, group members step forward and state “I’m a . . .” and add to thescene. For example, subsequent group members could respond with “I’m a

160 A. PHILLIPS SHEESLEY ET AL.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

ern

Col

orad

o] a

t 12:

00 2

2 Ju

ne 2

016

flower” or “I’m a sun.” This pattern continues until every group member hascontributed to create a stage picture that includes all of the objects.

In CIT, the group leader can focus on facilitating group cohesiveness byresponding positively to every group member’s named object and encoura-ging other group members to also respond energetically. In doing so, thegroup leader hopes to encourage each group members to ask internally “Howcan I be of service to others?” instead of remaining focused on the self-criticalinternal dialogue that prevents social engagement. In the popular literatureon improv comedy found in books and online sources, there are many othersimilar improv exercises designed to facilitate group cohesiveness, as it isessential to skillfully executed improv comedy: “When an improviser lets goand trusts his fellow performers, it’s a wonderful, liberating experience thatstems from group support” (Halpern, Close, & Johnson, 1994, p. 16). All ofthe improv comedy exercises promoting group cohesiveness facilitate anenvironment of acceptance of others and of oneself that is crucial to alleviat-ing symptoms of SAD.

Play

Another therapeutic element of CIT potentially beneficial for the treatment ofSAD is play. Mental health professionals have long recognized the healing powersof play for children and adults alike. Two forms of established group play therapyfor adults have their foundation in theatrical improvisation—psychodrama, devel-oped first, and drama therapy. According to Kedem-Tahar and Kellermann(1996), both psychodrama and drama therapy use techniques such as “roleplaying, impersonation, enactment and improvisation for the purpose of helpingpeople to deal with various aspects of their lives” (p. 27). In the early 1920s, JosephMoreno developed psychodrama after becoming interested in the therapeuticimpact of “completely spontaneous theater” (Kedem-Tahar & Kellermann,1996, p. 27). Kellermann (1992) described the basic framework of psychodrama:

A number of scenes are enacted depicting, for example, memories of specifichappenings in the past, unfinished situations, inner dramas, fantasies, dreams,preparations for future risk-taking situations or unrehearsed expressions of mentalstates in the here and now. . . . If required, other roles may be taken by groupmembers or by inanimate objects. (p. 20)

According to Moreno, the therapeutic mechanism of psychodrama includesthe activation of an individual’s creativity through physical involvement andspontaneity. Blatner (2002), in Play Therapy with Adults, explained Moreno’stheory: “Active physical involvement adds to the warming-up to spontaneitybecause the active involvement opens up a corresponding flow of intuitions,images, feelings, and insights that are otherwise distanced and blocked by

JOURNAL OF CREATIVITY IN MENTAL HEALTH 161

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

ern

Col

orad

o] a

t 12:

00 2

2 Ju

ne 2

016

more passive verbal modes of exchange” (p. 35). Activating creativityimproves the individual’s ability to respond differently to the presentingproblem instead of conforming to habits of thought and behavior that arecontributing to pathology.

Drama therapy developed during the 1960s under the framework ofexperimental theater (Kedem-Tahar & Kellermann, 1996). In contrast tothe more rigid parameters of psychodrama, drama therapy emphasizes“spontaneity, creativity, and play” (Kedem-Tahar & Kellermann, 1996,p. 28). Drama therapists use a wide-range of techniques including music,movement, props, and improvisation (Kedem-Tahar & Kellermann,1996). A search of the literature identified few empirical studies usingdrama therapy in the treatment of SAD. In one study, Dadsetan, Anari,and Sedghpour (2008) randomly selected 16 children (10–11 years) toreceive weekly 2-hr sessions of drama therapy for 6 weeks. At the end ofthe 6 weeks, the children reported significantly lower scores on theLiebowitz Social Anxiety Scale for Children and Adolescents(LSAS-CA) than the control group (Masia, Klein, & Liebowitz, 1999).

The keystone of both psychodrama and drama therapy is active play fromparticipants. The act of playing, in addition to inspiring creativity, can giveparticipants the needed permission for cathartic emotional expression. Blatner(2002) insightfully explained the role of play within therapy sessions: “Thismakes the therapy session into a kind of ‘fail-safe’ laboratory in which parti-cipants can explore self-expression of feelings that are not generally acceptablein conventional society, much less in the sensitive context of many families”(p. 35). Essentially, the proposed CIT attempts to harness the therapeuticpowers of play through spontaneity and creativity, as emphasized earlier inpsychodrama and drama therapy, in an effort to reduce social anxiety. Inparticular, the therapeutic power of play in CIT benefits individuals withSAD by expanding the creativity necessary to choose a different response insocial situations, a response that engenders deeper social connections insteadof a response that focuses on feelings of anxiety and avoidance. The followingimprov comedy exercise is designed to promote play among group members.

PanelThe group leader assigns a different occupation to each group member.The members are then instructed to invent characters with those occupa-tions and respond accordingly to questions asked by the group leader andother group members. For example, if someone is assigned to the occupa-tion of jeweler and then asked, “What is the meaning of life?” they mightrespond, “The meaning of life is to surround yourself with as many beautifulthings as possible.” The group leader and group members then ask follow-upquestions in turn, ideally open-ended, that delve deeper into the character, such as“How does your focus onmaterial objects impact your relationships with others?”

162 A. PHILLIPS SHEESLEY ET AL.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

ern

Col

orad

o] a

t 12:

00 2

2 Ju

ne 2

016

This exercise encourages group members to act spontaneously and creatively indeveloping questions and answers in the moment. The group environmentbecomes the “fail-safe” laboratory in which group members can experiment or“play”with different aspects of their personalities. According to Blatner (2002), thepractice of answering questions spontaneously can increase the individual’s “flowof intuitions, images, feelings, and insights” regardless of whether the answers arebased in the personhood of the participant or invented (p. 35). Following thisactivity, the group leader can ask process-oriented questions intended to deepenthe participants’ self-awareness of the creativity that emerged during the exercise.

Exposure

Exposure to feelings of social anxiety is an important therapeutic aspect ofCIT and crucial to the treatment of SAD. Gelatophobia, the fear of beinglaughed at and appearing ridiculous to social partners, frequently accompa-nies SAD (Carretero-Dios, Ruch, Agudelo, Platt, & Proyer, 2010) and stimu-lates feelings of shame that can inhibit happiness (Platt & Ruch, 2009). AlbertEllis (1987) developed several exposure-based techniques for treating thisaspect of social anxiety and labeled them shame-attacking exercises. Forexample, Ellis encouraged socially anxious clients to stop strangers in publicand say, “I just got out of the mental institute. What month is it?” Inperforming shame-attacking exercises, an individual is forced to challengethe assumption that being negatively evaluated or appearing foolish in publicis harmful and intolerable. Hofmann and Otto’s (2008) manual for thetreatment of SAD includes other shame-attacking exercises such as singing“God Bless America” in a subway station for 30 min or asking a bookstoreclerk where to find books on certain bodily functions.

By its very nature, the proposed CIT model provides ample opportunityfor exposure to feelings of embarrassment and shame as many improvcomedy exercises are specifically designed to confront barriers that inhibitcreative expression. The following exercise generates exposure to theseuncomfortable feelings but then allows processing in the context of anaccepting group.

Small talk initiationIn this exercise, one to three participants are asked to leave the room. Whilethey are gone, the remaining group members break into smaller groups oftwo to three. The group leader then assigns each group with a different“difficulty level” indicating how difficult it will be for an outsider to join theirconversation. When the absent participants reenter the room, each mustattempt to enter into a group’s conversation by practicing various initiationskills previously taught by the group leader (e.g., listening and finding ajump-in point, asking questions, sharing a story or joke, commenting on

JOURNAL OF CREATIVITY IN MENTAL HEALTH 163

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

ern

Col

orad

o] a

t 12:

00 2

2 Ju

ne 2

016

something said). After 3 to 5 min with each group, the leader will then tellparticipants to switch groups and try again to enter the conversation.Following the exercise, the group leader can ask process questions intendedto explore any feelings of embarrassment and shame provoked by theexercise, especially as the “difficulty level” increased or decreased. Groupleaders should also interview group members to uncover their unique,most-anxious social situations and then work to develop specific improvisedexposure activities dubbed “strategic improv” based on these specific needs.

Humor

Although “being funny” is by no means required of participants, humor andlaughter typically emerge in CIT as group cohesiveness builds and the groupbecomes more authentic. As improvisers Halpern et al. (1994) observed,“When we’re relaxing, we don’t have to entertain each other with jokes.And when we’re simply opening ourselves up to each other and being honest,we’re usually funniest” (p. 15). The CIT model emphasizes humor andlaughter because of the beneficial physiological changes that occur duringlaughter and the perspective-taking that humor encourages. Jacobs (2009)reminded us, “Although laughing and crying are two basic inborn emotionalrelations, psychoanalysts and psychotherapists have been much more inter-ested in the phenomenon of crying than laughing” (Strean, 1994, p. 499).CIT, in contrast to psychodrama and drama therapy, is innovative because itexplicitly emphasizes humor and laughter.

In the fields of physiology, neurology, and psychoneuroimmunology,recent studies have documented that the use of humor strengthens theimmune system and speeds recovery from both physical and psychologicalillness. During laughter, various beneficial physiological changes occur in thebody. Laughter can lead to muscle relaxation, and recent studies suggest thatthe physiologically stress-relieving process of laughter could reduce anxietyindependently from the psychological mechanisms (Bennett & Lengacher,2008). For example, Overeem, Taal, Öcal Gezici, Lammers, and Van Dijk(2004) found that spinal motor excitability measured by the Hoffman reflexdecreased following genuine laughter.

Humor and laughter go hand-in-hand, and both can develop naturallyin CIT. Under the category of “Proposed Axes for Further Study,” theDSM-IV-TR (2000) defines humor as coping with “emotional conflict orexternal stressors by emphasizing the amusing or ironic aspects of theconflict or stressor” (p. 812). The DSM-IV-TR (2000) places humor at thehighest adaptive level. In The American Journal of Family Therapy,Panichelli (2013) wrote astutely about humor in psychotherapy: “[J]okescan be used to talk about the problem without talking about the problem,bringing more safety into the interaction: ‘the message is given in a

164 A. PHILLIPS SHEESLEY ET AL.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

ern

Col

orad

o] a

t 12:

00 2

2 Ju

ne 2

016

disguised way’ (Nardone & Portelli, 2007, p. 88)” (p. 444). CIT, throughits emphasis on humor and laughter, allows individuals with SAD toconfront their struggles with a new perspective and promotes curativephysiological responses to anxiety. The following exercise can invokehumor and laughter among group members.

1,001The group leader assigns a group member any particular noun. Upon receivingthe word, the group member must immediately create a joke based on thefollowing framework. For example, if the group member receives the wordbananas, they would begin: “1,001 bananas walk into a restaurant. The waitersays, “We don’t serve bananas.” The bananas say, “Why not?” and the waiterresponds, “Because [as improvised by the group member] you always sit in abig bunch and leave a slippery mess!” Regardless of the quality of the joke,once the participant is finished, the rest of the group applauds and laughsuproariously. The group member then provides the word for the next indivi-dual in the circle. After the first round, group members are instructed to repeatthe process, but this time, repeat the joke as if they were famous comedianswith the objective of telling the joke more confidently. At the conclusion of theexercise, the group leader can ask process questions to encourage self-aware-ness of the therapeutic power of laughter, both physiologically and emotion-ally. A reflective process led by the group leader can also guide and encouragegroup members to embrace a humorous perspective of social anxiety; feelingridiculous is part of the human experience.

Current clinical practice

Since 2012, the authors Mark Pfeffer and Becca Barish have facilitated aprogram known as Improv for Anxiety for the treatment of SAD in adults andadolescents. Improv for Anxiety operates in partnership with The Second CityTraining Center in Chicago, led by Kerry Sheehan, and involves groupmembers meeting twice a week for a period of 8 weeks. The first 2.5-hrsession of each week provides an opportunity for group members to engagein a traditional improv comedy class led by skilled improvisers at The SecondCity Training Center who are sensitive to SAD. The second 2-hr session ofeach week uses the proposed CIT model and involves practicing selectedimprov comedy exercises (i.e., strategic improv) led by two mental healthprofessionals experienced in group facilitation and in improv comedy. In thissecond session, group members also discuss issues that have emerged andcheck-in with other group members in order to strengthen group cohesive-ness. Lastly, the group leaders engage the group in important aspects ofGCBT such as providing psychoeducation about unhelpful thinking stylesand discussing methods of cognitive restructuring. Depending on the

JOURNAL OF CREATIVITY IN MENTAL HEALTH 165

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

ern

Col

orad

o] a

t 12:

00 2

2 Ju

ne 2

016

professional training of the group leader(s), the proposed CIT model can alsobe implemented in conjunction with other models of therapy empiricallyevaluated for effectiveness in the treatment of SAD. Furthermore, in theImprov for Anxiety program, individual therapy of any method is recom-mended but not required. Improv for Anxiety has received positive responsesfrom its over 350 participants and is currently being empirically evaluated byGreg Poljacik at the University of Chicago using the Liebowitz Social AnxietyScale (Liebowitz, 1987).

Requirements and limitations

Our personal experience in the practice of improv comedy informs thestrong suggestion that implementing CIT for the treatment of SAD requiresa group leader who is both experienced in group facilitation and familiarwith improv comedy. The group leader can guide the group as it progressesfrom group improv comedy exercises, such as the ones described in thisarticle, to the development of full scenes with complex characters and story-lines. The group leader must possess the skill to pause the group for ther-apeutic processing at important junctures in order to truly harness thetherapeutic powers of group cohesiveness, play, exposure, and humoremphasized in CIT. The mental health professional should, at minimum,seek out basic training in improv comedy and/or the CIT model to ethicallyprovide this treatment.

In addition to the training of the group leader, another important con-sideration is the careful selection of group members by the group leader. Asindicated in group therapy literature, group members should be chosen withconsideration to the severity of their symptoms and the similarity of theirpresenting problems. Group leaders must acknowledge that comorbid con-ditions are common among individuals with SAD and that group therapy isnot appropriate for all individuals with SAD, especially in the case of trauma.Multicultural considerations regarding the use of humor in counseling set-tings are equally critical. Maples et al. (2001) provided a summary of existingliterature and guidance on the appropriate use of humor in counseling withinmulticultural populations. The authors wisely advised, “As in any counselingrelationship, but perhaps magnified with ethnically diverse clients, the ele-ment of mutual trust and respect should clearly be present before humor isused” (p. 59). Lastly, group leaders must possess awareness that humor andlaughter can sometimes be employed as unhealthy defense mechanisms.Conrad Hyers (1969), an American writer and theologian, reminded us: “Itis possible to laugh at oneself as a way of excusing oneself, as a technique fornot looking candidly at oneself” (p. 26). Group leaders sensitive to theselimitations are better able to select appropriate individuals for the group andimplement CIT in the treatment of SAD.

166 A. PHILLIPS SHEESLEY ET AL.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

ern

Col

orad

o] a

t 12:

00 2

2 Ju

ne 2

016

Conclusion

Individuals with SAD are frequently denied the simple pleasure and profoundmeaning that deep human connections provide. Given the high percentage ofnonresponders to GCBT alone (Eng et al., 2001) and the dearth of treatmentoptions emphasizing “appetitive goals and activities and positive emotion”(Kashdan & Steger, 2006, p. 126), CIT warrants further exploration for thetreatment of SAD and other mental health issues. Given the stigma associatedwith mental health treatment, an improv comedy wellness group may alsoattract more individuals suffering silently with SAD. For clients and mentalhealth professionals interested in a creative alternative that harnesses multipletherapeutic elements, CIT may provide a novel pathway to recovery.

Note

This article includes discussion of the program Improv for Anxiety and TheSecond City Training Center. The authors Mark Pfeffer and Becca Barish, inpartnership with The Second City Training Center, currently facilitate thecomedic improv therapy portion of the program Improv for Anxiety. BeccaBarish is also a faculty member at The Second City Training Center whereshe teaches traditional improv comedy classes. This article does not necessa-rily reflect the views of The Second City Training Center.

ORCID

Alison Phillips Sheesley http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6525-6512

Notes on contributors

Alison Phillips Sheesley is a Ph.D. student in the Department of Applied Psychology andCounselor Education at the University of Northern Colorado, Greeley, Colorado.

Mark Pfeffer is a Psychotherapist and Director of the Panic/Anxiety/Recovery Center(PARC), Chicago, Illinois. He is a Consultant for Educational Services and the co-founderof the Improv for Anxiety Program at The Second City Training Center, Chicago, Illinois.

Becca Barish is Head of The Wellness Program at The Second City Training Center, Chicago,Illinois.

References

American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental dis-orders (5th ed.). Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric.

Andlin-Sobocki, P., Jönsson, B., Wittchen, H., & Olesen, J. (2005). Cost of disorders ofthe brain in Europe. European Journal Of Neurology, 12(Suppl. 1), 1–27. doi:10.1111/j.1468-1331.2005.01202.x

JOURNAL OF CREATIVITY IN MENTAL HEALTH 167

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

ern

Col

orad

o] a

t 12:

00 2

2 Ju

ne 2

016

Bennett, M. P., & Lengacher, C. (2008). Humor and laughter may influence health: III.Laughter and health outcomes. Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine,5(1), 37–40. doi:10.1093/ecam/nem041

Blatner, A. (2002). Psychodrama. In C. Schaefer (Ed.), Play therapy with adults (pp. 35–61).Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.

Carretero-Dios, H., Ruch, W., Agudelo, D., Platt, T., & Proyer, R. T. (2010). Fear of beinglaughed at and social anxiety: A preliminary psychometric study. Psychology Test andAssessment Modeling, 52(1), 108–124.

ChicagoIdeasWeek. (2012, November 15). Mick Napier: A place of yes [Video file]. Retrievedfrom https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYv4vAnnuts

Dadsetan, P., Anari, A., & Sedghpour, B. S. (2008). Social anxiety disorders and drama-therapy.Journal of Iranian Psychologists, 4, 115–123.

Ellis, A. (1987). Integrative developments in rational-emotive therapy (RET). Journal ofIntegrative & Eclectic Psychotherapy, 6(4), 470–479.

Eng, W., Coles, M. E., Heimberg, R. G., & Safren, S. A. (2001). Quality of life followingcognitive behavioral treatment for social anxiety disorder: Preliminary findings. Depressionand Anxiety, 13(4), 192–193. doi:10.1002/da.1037.abs

Halpern, C., Close, D., & Johnson, K. H. (1994). Truth in comedy: The manual of improvisa-tion. Colorado Springs, CO: Meriwether.

Hofmann, S. G., & Otto, W. M. (2008). Cognitive-behavior therapy of social anxiety disorder:Evidence-based and disorder specific treatment techniques. New York, NY: Routledge.

Hyers, C. (1969). The comic profanation of the sacred. In C. Hyers (Ed.), Holy laughter:Essays on religion in the comic perspective (pp. 9–27). New York, NY: Seabury Press.

Jacobs, S. (2009). Humour in gestalt therapy—Curative force and catalyst for change: A casestudy. South African Journal of Psychology, 39(4), 498–506. doi:10.1177/008124630903900411

Kashdan, T. B., & Steger, M. F. (2006). Expanding the topography of social anxiety.Psychological Science, 17(2), 120–128. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01674.x

Kedem-Tahar, E., & Kellermann, P. F. (1996). Psychodrama and drama therapy: A compar-ison. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 23(1), 27–36. doi:10.1016/0197-4556(95)00059-3

Kellermann, P. F. (1992). Focus on psychodrama: The therapeutic aspects of psychodrama.London, England: Jessica Kingsley.

Kessler, R. C., Chiu, W. T., Demler, O., & Walters, E. E. (2005). Prevalence, severity, andcomorbidity of 12-month DSM-IV disorders in the National Comorbidity SurveyReplication. Archives of General Psychiatry, 62(6), 617–627. doi:10.1001/archpsyc.62.6.617

Leonard, K., & Yorton, T. (2015). Yes, and: How improvisation reverses “No, But” thinkingand improves creativity and collaboration—Lessons from the second city. New York, NY:HarperCollins.

Liebowitz, M. R. (1987). Social phobia.Modern Problems of Pharmacopsychiatry, 22(1), 147–173.Maples, M. F., Dupey, P., Torres-Rivera, E., Phan, L. T., Vereen, L., & Garrett, M. T. (2001).

Ethnic diversity and the use of humor in counseling: Appropriate or inappropriate? Journalof Counseling & Development, 79(1), 53–60. doi:10.1002/j.1556-6676.2001.tb01943.x

Masia, C. L., Klein, R. G., & Liebowitz, M. R. (1999). The Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale forChildren and Adolescents (LSAS-CA). New York, NY: Carrie Masia-Warner, NYU ChildStudy Center.

Mesa, F., Beidel, D. C., & Bunnell, B. E. (2014). An examination of psychopathology and dailyimpairment in adolescents with social anxiety disorder. Plos ONE, 9(4), 1–9. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0093668

168 A. PHILLIPS SHEESLEY ET AL.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

ern

Col

orad

o] a

t 12:

00 2

2 Ju

ne 2

016

Nardone, G., & Portelli, C. (2007). The use of humour and other creative acts as a vehicle ofchange in brief strategic therapy. Cahiers critiques de thérapie familiale, 39(2), 83–92.doi:10.3917/ctf.039.0083

Overeem, S., Taal, W., Öcal Gezici, E., Lammers, G. J., & Van Dijk, J. G. (2004). Is motorinhibition during laughter due to emotional or respiratory influences? Psychophysiology, 41(2), 254–258. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.2003.00145.x

Panichelli, C. (2013). Humor, joining, and reframing in psychotherapy: Resolving theauto-double-bind. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 41(5), 437–451.doi:10.1080/01926187.2012.755393

Platt, T., & Ruch, W. (2009). The emotions of gelotophobes: Shameful, fearful, and joyless?Humor - International Journal of Humor Research, 22(1–2), 91–110. doi:10.1515/HUMR.2009.005

Rae-Dupree, J. (2008, March 2). Can executives learn to ignore the script? The New YorkTimes. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com

Salinsky, T., & Frances-White, D. (2008). The improv handbook: The ultimate guide toimprovising in comedy, theatre, and beyond. New York, NY: Continuum International.

Steitzer, C. (2011). The brilliant genius: Using improv comedy in social work groups. SocialWork With Groups, 34(3–4), 270–282. doi:10.1080/01609513.2011.558830

Strean, H. (1994). The use of humour in psychotherapy. London, England: Jason Aronson.Trew, C., & Nelson, T. (2013). Improv wins: An improv comedy textbook. New Orleans, LA:

Studio 8 Comedy.Weiller, E., Bisserbe, J. C., Boyer, P., Lepine, J. P., & Lecrubier, Y. (1996). Social phobia in

general health care: An unrecognised undertreated disabling disorder. The British Journalof Psychiatry, 168(2), 169–174. doi:10.1192/bjp.168.2.169

Wersebe, H., Sijbrandij, M., & Cuijpers, P. (2013). Psychological group-treatments of socialanxiety disorder: A meta-analysis. Plos ONE, 8(12). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0079034

Yalom, I. (2005). The theory and practice of group psychotherapy (5th ed.). New York, NY:Basic Books.

JOURNAL OF CREATIVITY IN MENTAL HEALTH 169

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

ern

Col

orad

o] a

t 12:

00 2

2 Ju

ne 2

016