top of page
Search

I’m a Little Bit Famous: Maps, Algorithms, and What Actually Works

Writer: Galen Cole
Galen Cole
Oct 11
4 min read

By Galen Cole, PhD, MPH, LPC


There is nothing new under the sun. Ecclesiastes said it, and clinical practice keeps confirming it. Clients and colleagues still ask, “Have you ever heard of such-and-such approach?” as if a new name equals a new mechanism. Most of the time the principles are older than the trademark. Someone has simply reorganized, rebranded, or re-sequenced what already works so it can be owned, marketed, and sold as the next essential thing.


That linguistic problem is real. When every inventor renames interventions to distinguish their work, the field fills with competing labels. Clients arrive already carrying the latest one. Therapists feel pressure to learn yet another protocol that largely recycles cognitive restructuring, behavioral activation, exposure, values clarification, or mindfulness practices under fresh branding. The result is confusion about what is actually evidence-based, what is packaging, and what changes outcomes.


I did not invent a psychotherapy approach. I invented an algorithm.

The 2022 paper in Cogent Psychology proposed the Trans-Theoretical Model for Mindful Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (TM-MCBT) as an organizing framework rather than another branded therapy. It supplies a flexible, principle-governed structure built around the logic of the ABC model and related CBT processes. Practitioners can still choose the most relevant evidence-based interventions for a given client. Researchers gain clearer language for describing what happened, when, and how often. Clients and the public receive a common lexicon instead of a parade of proprietary names. The model functions as a clinical decision tree—an algorithm—not a new trademarked protocol. In the spirit of Will Ferrell’s Ron Burgundy in Anchorman, I am a little bit famous for that contribution, not for inventing the next greatest thing on the block.


Maps of meaning matter here. People need ways to see where they stand and what orientation is driving the work. David Hawkins’ Map of Consciousness offers one popular conceptual map: levels running from shame, guilt, and fear upward through courage, acceptance, and love. It is not a validated clinical instrument in the same sense as established CBT protocols, but it functions as a shared language for orientation. Desire-level striving sits lower on such maps. Constant pursuit of “more”—more achievement, more state change, more breakthrough—can reinforce the very sense of lack it tries to escape.


A recent Instagram reel by Steven Young (@stevenyoungalchemist) made a related point about teachers such as Tony Robbins and Joe Dispenza. Both are skilled communicators who have helped many people. Young’s critique, offered as opinion, is that the “more” way of living is unsustainable because it feeds the illusion that we lack something and are “not there yet.” Commenters connected the observation to Hawkins-style maps and noted that the next evolution may involve less outward striving and more stable presence. The useful clinical takeaway is not a rejection of high-energy methods when they serve a clear goal. It is recognition that an orientation organized around perpetual insufficiency keeps attention on deficit. You feel what you focus on. A map that only points toward the next peak can keep the traveler from noticing the ground already underfoot.


Logic models and algorithms cut through that noise. A good logic model makes the sequence explicit: status and values or vision, activating events, appraisal, emotional and physiological response, adaptive coping, and feedback. It does not require a new name for each technique. It lets a clinician ask which evidence-based element fits this client at this point, measure whether it is being delivered, and adjust without abandoning the structure. That is different from collecting branded approaches and hoping the newest one contains the missing piece. Most “new” approaches turn out to be familiar principles—cognitive change, behavioral practice, acceptance, values alignment, skills for emotion regulation—rearranged and renamed. The algorithm organizes them so the field can keep integrating what works instead of restarting the conversation with every rebrand.


What works remains stubbornly ordinary: clear assessment of the problem, targeted change in thought and behavior, deliberate practice until the new response is available under pressure, and measurement of whether life actually improves. Trauma-informed mindful CBT, as developed in the Trauma-Informed Model for Mindful Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (TI-MCBT), keeps those core elements while systematically adding attention to the body’s response and to meaning. Drawing on polyvagal theory, sensorimotor processing,


Deep Brain Reorienting, and related bottom-up methods, the model prioritizes neurophysiological safety and somatic stabilization before higher-order cognitive work, then coordinates evidence-based techniques across a clear sequence—from personal status and values through activating events, stress, appraisal, emotional and physiological response, and adaptive coping. Its explicit decision-tree structure functions as a clinical algorithm rather than another proprietary protocol. Clients benefit when the therapist can say, in plain language, which mechanism is being used and why—whether regulating autonomic arousal, titrating access to implicit memory, or aligning behavior with a value-based vision—rather than introducing yet another branded approach the client must first learn to trust.


This version draws directly on the paper’s description of TI-MCBT as an organizing framework and algorithm that embeds trauma-neuroscience principles within a phased CBT architecture, without adding a new trademarked therapy. It preserves the original paragraph’s emphasis on ordinary, measurable elements of change while making the contribution of the 2026 model more concrete and precise.


Maps help us see the territory. Algorithms help us navigate it without inventing a new trail every time someone wants credit for the path. The linguistic problem will continue as long as branding is profitable. The practical response is not to chase every new name. It is to keep the underlying principles visible, the decision logic explicit, and the focus on what changes the client’s actual life. That is less glamorous than the next greatest thing. It is also more durable.


References

Cole, G. (2022). The trans-theoretical model for mindful cognitive behavioral therapy (TM-MCBT): A paradigm for systematically advancing evidence-based practice and research. Cogent Psychology, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311908.2022.2080320

Cole, G. E. (2026). The Trauma-Informed Model for Mindful Cognitive Behavioral Therapy. Medical Research Archives, 14(1). https://esmed.org/MRA/mra/article/view/7197

Ecclesiastes 1:9 (English Standard Version).

Hawkins, D. R. (1995/2012). Power vs. Force: The Hidden Determinants of Human Behavior. Hay House.

Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy. (2004). Directed by Adam McKay. DreamWorks.


Learn more and connect:

Phone: 678-629-2578



© 2026 Galen E. Cole, PhD, MPH, LPC. All rights reserved. This essay is an original work first published at galencole.com. No part of this work may be reproduced, redistributed, scraped, or used to train commercial models without prior written permission, except for brief quotation with clear attribution to the author and a link to the original post.



 
 
 

Comments

bottom of page