It is possible that I may have made an incorrect generalization from the five or six behavioral therapists I have seen. The old anchoring techniques from the early days of NLP involved a realization that emotions are as much a part of subjective experience as cognition and behavior and that they are just as available for a therapist to work with. One can then assist the client to take that feeling of confidence back to the past experience, and imagine going through the past experience while feeling confident. The use of anchors is a mechanism for making a desirable emotional state available when needed during therapy. However I myself am not at all convinced that anchoring is really necessary.
Clinical psychology tends to start from the concept of a disorder.
In psychology, though, there is usually no generally accepted single proper way for the mind to function. However the process of fixing this will involve having the client move out of the problem state into some other state, and if the attention of the therapist and client is focused on the Problem, this new state is likely to be selected by default and may not be the most desirable. I think that this is a question which can lead to a real scientific investigation of the mind, emotions, and behavior. An investigation that bridges both clinical and scientific psychology. When the main justification that a science has for itself is how scientific it is, rather than how many worthwhile discoveries it makes, that is a strong indication that something is wrong.