Toward a working through of some core conflicts in psychotherapy research
Author:
Jacques P. Barber a
| Affiliation: | a Center for Psychotherapy Research, Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA |
DOI:
10.1080/10503300802609680
Publication Frequency:
6 issues per year
Subjects:
Counseling;
Ethics & Legal issues in Mental Health;
Psychiatry & Clinical Psychology - Adult;
Psychotherapy;
Formats available:
HTML
(English)
:
PDF
(English)
You have:
FREE ACCESS
View Article:
View Article (PDF)
in English
View Article (HTML)
in English
Abstract
The author discusses the evidence for six basic statements that many, but not all, psychotherapy researchers adhere to: (1) The therapeutic alliance has a causal role in outcome, (2) therapeutic techniques explain patients' outcome, (3) therapists determine outcome, (4) patients determine therapy outcome, (5) randomized controlled trials (RCTs) provide valuable data, (6) data from RCTs are almost worthless. These “truths” combine to form three core conflicts: Is psychotherapy about the alliance or techniques? Does the patient or therapist determine the outcome? Are RCTs a blessing or a curse? After showing that these statements oversimplify the research of the therapeutic process, the author recommends keeping both sides of the conflict in awareness and endorses a pluralistic methodological approach for the study of both efficacy and the mechanisms of psychotherapy.
|
| Keywords: alliance; aptitude-treatment interaction research; brief psychotherapy; cognitive-behavioral therapy; depression; long-term psychotherapy; outcome research; personality disorders; philosophical theoretical issues in therapy research; process research |
| view references (58) : view citations |

Download Citation


ol
ais
s
CiteULike
Del.icio.us
BibSonomy
Connotea