Books / Cognitive & behavioural
A Guide to Rational Living
In A Guide to Rational Living (1961), Albert Ellis and Robert A. Harper present a self-help approach that examines connections between thinking and emotion. This entry identifies the original Prentice-Hall edition.
Book details
Author of listed edition: Albert Ellis and Robert A. Harper
Edition: 1961 edition
Publisher: Prentice-Hall
Edition year: 1961
Language and origin: English (United States)
Form and genre: Self-Help & Client Workbook
Level: Introductory
Historical era: 1960–1979 · Humanistic, Cognitive & Systemic Turn
Covers: The authors’ account of thinking and emotion; Self-analysis and challenging beliefs; The authors’ approach to fears and frustration
APA 7th reference: Ellis, A., & Harper, R. A. (1961). A guide to rational living. Prentice-Hall.
What it is & historical context
The National Library of Medicine catalogue identifies the 1961 Prentice-Hall book by Ellis and Harper as a popular work. Its contents describe self-analysis, thinking and emotion, fears and frustration. This record concerns the 1961 edition; a later Wilshire edition is a separate publication.
Core clinical themes & arguments
The chapter list presents a self-help approach concerned with how thoughts relate to feelings. In the later REBT account described by the Albert Ellis Institute, practitioners help people examine beliefs about events. These are features of a model, not proof that every person’s distress has the same cause.
Clinical practice, reception & legacy
A 2024 systematic review examined REBT interventions across settings. The authors found methodological limitations and reported that most studies involved non-clinical adults in educational settings. The review concerns a range of interventions, not a trial of this book, and does not establish what an individual reader will experience.
Reader level & educational scope
This introductory entry is an educational orientation. The 1961 book was not reviewed in full; the catalogue, contents listing, institute overview and review abstract were consulted. The book’s historical language and recommendations should be read in context.
Paired academic and clinical scholarship
Paired work: Rational and Irrational Beliefs: Research, Theory, and Clinical Practice (Daniel David, Steven Jay Lynn, and Albert Ellis (Eds.), 2010)
Reference: David, D., Lynn, S. J., & Ellis, A. (Eds.). (2010). Rational and irrational beliefs: Research, theory, and clinical practice. Oxford University Press.
An edited collection on the theory, research and clinical practice of rational and irrational beliefs. The publisher record was consulted; the book was not reviewed in full.
Source-mapped claims and evidence notes
Claim 1: The book’s contents include chapters on thinking and feeling, self-analysis, approval and frustration. (The catalogue’s contents listing was consulted; the full 1961 book was not reviewed.) [Source 2: Google Books. A guide to rational living: 1961 edition record.]
Claim 2: In the REBT model, beliefs about events are considered relevant to emotional distress, and practitioners may help people examine those beliefs. (This describes the Albert Ellis Institute’s account of REBT, not an established explanation of all distress or an assessment of the book’s effectiveness.) [Source 3: Albert Ellis Institute. Rational emotive behavior therapy.]
Sources and inspection notes
Ellis, A., & Harper, R. A. (1961). A guide to rational living. Prentice-Hall.
Supports: National Library of Medicine catalogue identifying the authors, 1961 Prentice-Hall edition and popular-work classification. The full book was not reviewed.
Google Books. A guide to rational living: 1961 edition record.
Supports: Catalogue record and table of contents for the 1961 edition; the full book was not reviewed.
Albert Ellis Institute. Rational emotive behavior therapy.
Supports: The institute’s description of the REBT model and the role of beliefs; this is not an independent efficacy evaluation.
Supports: Abstract of a review of 162 intervention studies, including settings, samples and methodological limitations. The full article was not reviewed.
Supports: Publisher record for the related edited collection; the full book was not reviewed.