An Outsider's Perspective on Psychotherapy Integration

This article offers those who are identified with progress in psychotherapy integration an outsider's perspective on progress in the field. The author argues for a contextual study of psychotherapy and psychotherapy integration, noting that the social psychology of psychotherapy may be an overlooked dimension in the study of psychotherapy integration. He suggests that perceptions of progress in psychotherapy integration may be exaggerated due to the lack of such a perspective.     

A Participant-Observer's Perspective on Psychotherapy Integration

Jacobson has raised a number of issues about the usefulness of psychotherapy integration. Some of his concerns stem from his doubt that people are capable of change, and some that appear to be the result of a misinterpretation of what constitutes psychotherapy integration. This article attempts to clarify some of these misunderstandings, which seem to be the result of equating psychotherapy integration with the integration of theories. Comments are also made about the research underpinings related to work in this area.     

Bridging Technical Eclecticism and Theoretical Integration: Assimilative Integration

Assimilative integration is a new type of psychotherapy integration introduced by Messer in 1992. This paper explains the where, what, when, and how of this integrative route, outlines its advantages and weaknesses, and discusses areas for potential assimilative practice in various models of therapy. Following a brief review of the current status of psychotherapy integration and its practices, assimilative integration is conceptualized as a mini theoretical integration and as theoretical eclecticism it is offered as a bridge between theoretical integration and technical eclecticism. Assimilative integration is proposed as the best theoretically and empirically based integrative approach available at this time, particularly for therapists who have been trained in a single mode of therapy before they became integrationists.     

A pluralistic framework for counselling and psychotherapy: Implications for research

Historically, training, research and practice in counselling and psychotherapy have been dominated by unitary theoretical models. Although integrative and eclectic positions have been developed as alternatives, these have not been successful in generating research and have resulted in a further proliferation of competing models. In this paper we introduce a ‘pluralistic’ framework for counselling and psychotherapy and discuss the implications of this framework for research. The basic principle of this pluralistic framework is that psychological difficulties may have multiple causes and that there is unlikely to be one, ‘right’ therapeutic method that will be appropriate in all situations—different people are helped by different processes at different times. This pluralistic framework operates as a meta‐theory within which it is possible to utilise concepts, strategies and specific interventions from a range of therapeutic orientations. The framework is structured around three domains—goals, task and methods—by which therapeutic processes can be conceptualised, critically examined and empirically investigated. These domains, and the relationships between them, are outlined and the collaborative relationship at the heart of the pluralistic framework is discussed. The pluralistic framework provides a means for empirical research directly to inform practice and potential lines of empirical inquiry are outlined, along with findings from a recent study of counselling in schools.     

Complexity science: A framework for psychotherapy integration

The paradigm of complexity science provides a new way to address the problem of psychotherapy integration and allows us to bypass the various shortcomings of the linear-interventionist perspective. Nine criteria are outlined, which should be satisfied by any integrative approach to psychotherapy: (a) the use of complexity science to provide a meta-theoretical and generic understanding of change processes (from neuronal to social system levels); (b) a comprehensive and formalised modelling of change processes and personality development; (c) an integrative method of case formulation; (d) the ability to understand a variety of techniques in terms of basic change principles; (e) criteria to guide microdecisions; (f) the application of data-driven feedback and real-time monitoring of change dynamics; (g) standardised assessment of outcomes in naturalistic settings; (h) guidelines for training; and (i) strategies that are well-suited to science–practice integration. Using these criteria as a framework for evaluation, one may grasp the potential of complexity science to drive innovation in the pursuit of psychotherapy integration.     

The Clinical Challenges of Assimilative Integration

S. B. Messer (1992) introduced the notion of assimilative integration in psychotherapy, theorizing that integrative practitioners adhere to their preferred theoretical paradigms while judiciously blending aspects from other models. His assimilative approach offers a conceptual and clinical middle ground between technical eclecticism and a grand, unified theory of psychotherapy. However, the practice of competent assimilative integration is fraught with many challenges, both theoretical and clinical. The goal of the present paper is to explore the challenges of implementing assimilative integration. First, the theoretical and clinical barriers to assimilative approaches are considered. Second, the use of assimilative integration to avoid therapeutic failures is discussed. Finally, a case example is presented to illustrate the author's attempt to assimilate narrative, interpretive interventions within his preferred cognitive–behavioral treatment paradigm.     

A Common Factors Approach to Psychotherapy Training

This article addresses training in psychotherapy integration from the perspective of common factors. Problems related to this training perspective are first reviewed. As an attempt to deal with such problems, current teaching and supervision efforts by the author are briefly described. Based on a developmental model of clinical learning, a sketch of a more comprehensive program of integrative psychotherapy training is advanced.     

Coming together and remaining a part: Development of a group-as-a-whole compass. Part II

Group-as-a-whole theory is an attempt to explain the collaboration and synergy that results when patients share their care. The art and science of treating individuals within psychotherapy groups is enriched by an understanding of the unique mediums ³ through which a group comes into being and the more general domains within which it comes to be known. This paper continues the development of a group-as-a-whole compass, as an integration of extant models and theories (Ettin, 1996). The focus shifts from conceptual and spatial models to an exploration of the cultural and relational processes that make up whole-group functioning. The paper comes full circle with hypotheses drawn about how a psychotherapy group, as a holistic phenomenon, is composed and maintained.Private practice, East Brunswick, New Jersey.     

The challenge of counselling and psychotherapy research

Aims: The purpose of this commentary is to argue that the value of counselling and psychotherapy research lies, not only in what it teaches us as therapists, but also in its ability to challenge us and our assumptions. Method: The paper identifies eight beliefs that may be prevalent in sections of the counselling and psychotherapy community, and presents evidence that challenges them. Findings: While many of our beliefs may hold true for some clients some of the time, the research evidence suggests that they are unlikely to be true for all clients all of the time. Discussion: By questioning and challenging therapists' a priori assumptions, research findings can help counsellors and psychotherapists to be less set in their beliefs; and more open to the unique experiences, characteristics and wants of each individual client.     

Can research influence clinical practice?1

After briefly reviewing the unfavourable reception accorded empirical research by parts of the psychoanalytic community, as well as some of the benefits to clinical practice of analysts being involved in research activities, the author examines whether the findings of process and outcome research in psychotherapy and psychoanalysis can help identify the most appropriate forms of intervention for producing therapeutic change, given the specific condition of the patient and the relationship that the individual establishes with the analyst. He argues that research findings can influence clinical practice on various levels and in different areas, and goes on to examine a number of related issues: the specificity of therapeutic interventions versus the relevance of common curative factors; the dyadic conception of technique and ways of understanding the therapeutic action of the treatment alliance; and the strategic or heuristic conception in psychoanalytic therapy. Finally, the author presents clinical material with the aim of illustrating how the knowledge acquired through research can be applied to psychoanalytic treatment.     

Therapist orientation,supervisor match,and therapeutic interventions: Implications for session quality in a psychotherapy training PRN

Background: Theoretical orientation is a multifaceted construct that is integral to the process of psychotherapy and psychotherapy training. While some research has been conducted on personal identification with particular schools of psychotherapy, techniques used in psychotherapy sessions, and match between trainees and supervisors in training, there is insufficient information regarding how these may interact with one another. Aim: This study, conducted in a practice research network of trainee therapists, was designed to test whether these variables may be related to one another in predicting session quality. Method: The sample comprised 328 sessions from 26 clients and 11 therapists, with the clients completing session quality measures and therapists completing measures of technique immediately post‐session. Results: Using multilevel linear modelling, the data showed varied results. For behavioural therapy and person‐centred therapy, techniques and orientation were unrelated to session quality in the sample. However, process‐experiential, psychodynamic, and cognitive therapy techniques were all involved in interactions with therapist and/or supervisor orientations. Conclusions: These results suggest that the impact of specific psychotherapy techniques sometimes depends on the orientation of the therapist and/or supervisor. For instance, sessions high in cognitive therapy techniques were only associated with positive outcome when both the therapist and supervisor were highly cognitively oriented. Though preliminary, these results suggest that orientation may be an important variable to consider in training and supervision, especially in the context of other variables.     

Considering methodological integrity in counselling and psychotherapy research

Within the field of counselling and psychotherapy research, qualitative methods have been a longstanding tradition of inquiry due to the mutual interest of therapists and researchers in both internal experiences and intersubjective processes. Methodological integrity is a conceptual framework that has been advanced to increase the rigor of these methods. In this paper, we consider the value of this concept for counselling and psychotherapy researchers and reviewers. This framework guides investigators and reviewers to consider how procedures can be adapted to meet the goals of specific studies, given their characteristics and approach to inquiry. In this brief article, we exemplify the relevance and application of this concept to this field by describing the decision‐making process within the designing of a qualitative research project to investigate clients' needs within rape crisis counselling. Through this exemplar, we also provide guidance to counselling and psychotherapy researchers on considerations during the process of research review and reporting.     

Psychotherapy research: an interplay between inner and outer and a succession of meanings

Psychotherapy research is a rapidly developing area of study that aims to explore the integration of inner and outer conditions of an individual’s experience, the interplay between subjective and objective, as well as between individual and collective. Questions regarding a more integrative view and qualitative research in psychotherapy are discussed in the paper. The author introduces some ideas from the studies on psychotherapy effectiveness that were done at Vilnius University by a group of researchers who work in the ‘Centre for research on the psychodynamics of personality’. Clinical psychologists who hold a doctorate degree or who are in doctoral studies in the Department of Psychology at Vilnius University are members of this research group. The subjective understanding about healing episodes and the development of depth premises were the main tasks of these studies. Among other methods, the researchers used the drawing a picture of a healing moment and telling a psychotherapy story recalled by the client to collect data. Two examples of drawing a picture of a healing moment and one example of telling a therapy story are analyzed in the paper. The themes of subjective experience of renewal in psychotherapy as well as the multiplicity of experience and results in psychotherapy are discussed in the paper with case illustrations. This study showed that drawing a picture opens one more dimension of reflection and that it can be an appropriate tool for developing individual narratives as well. Authoring and re‐authoring one’s life narrative is accepted as part of a productive therapy as well as discovering one’s inner authorship. The ability to follow a succession of meanings, as well as a connection to nature and culture could be one of the ways of actualizing an integrative view in psychotherapy research.     

Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy with People in Abusive Relationships

Summary

Psychoanalytic perspectives on violence between partners is describedand forms a foundation for an approach to group and individual psychotherapy of men and women in relationships in which there is physical violence between partners. The empirical results of a study of the outcome of psychoanalytically oriented psychotherapy are described. Nineteen men and 16 women completed research measures before beginning psychotherapy and after completing 16 sessions of group psychotherapy. Twelve people who completed group psychotherapy continued in individual psychotherapy and completed measures again after 16 sessions of individual psychotherapy, and nine people completed measures again after the 16 sessions of group and 32 sessions of individual psychotherapy. Statistical analyses addressed outcomes in terms of verbal and physical aggression and dysphoric affects and anger. Both research and clinical outcomes are discussed.     

Are psychodynamic and psychoanalytic therapies effective?: A review of empirical data

There is a need for empirical outcome research in psychodynamic and psychoanalytic therapy. However, both the approach of empirically supported therapies (EST) and the procedures of evidence‐based medicine (EBM) have severe limitations making randomised controlled trials (RCTs) an absolute standard. After a critical discussion of this approach, the author reviews the empirical evidence for the efficacy of psychodynamic psychotherapy in specific psychiatric disorders. The review aims to identify for which psychiatric disorders RCTs of specific models of psychodynamic psychotherapy are available and for which they are lacking, thus providing a basis for planning further research. In addition, results of process research of psychodynamic psychotherapy are presented. As the methodology of RCTs is not appropriate for psychoanalytic therapy, effectiveness studies of psychoanalytic therapy are reviewed as well. Studies of psychodynamic psychotherapy published between 1960 and 2004 were identifed by a computerised search using Medline, PsycINFO and Current Contents. In addition, textbooks and journal articles were used. Twenty‐two RCTs were identifed of which 64% had not been included in the 1998 report by Chambless and Hollon. According to the results, for the following psychiatric disorders at least one RCT providing evidence for the efficacy of psychodynamic psychotherapy was identifed: depressive disorders (4 RCTs), anxiety disorders (1 RCT), post‐traumatic stress disorder (1 RCT), somatoform disorder (4 RCTs), bulimia nervosa (3 RCTs), anorexia nervosa (2 RCTs), borderline personality disorder (2 RCTs), Cluster C personality disorder (1 RCT), and substance‐related disorders (4 RCTs). According to results of process research, outcome in psychodynamic psychotherapy is related to the competent delivery of therapeutic techniques and to the development of a therapeutic alliance. With regard to psychoanalytic therapy, controlled quasi‐experimental effectiveness studies provide evidence that psychoanalytic therapy is (1) more effective than no treatment or treatment as usual, and (2) more effective than shorter forms of psychodynamic therapy. Conclusions are drawn for future research.     

Psychological movement patterns in psychotherapy

The following article represents a first step in the formulation of a method of experiential psychotherapy which integrates content and process areas of clinical practice. The integration is based on Eugene Gendlin's experiential understanding of psychotherapy (1973), and on an adaption of Rudolf von Laban's movement system (Dell 1970). The article focuses on the methodological issues of this integrative approach. For a fuller discussion of this new approach and of its clinical application, see Saner (1981).     

My Perspective on Psychotherapy Integration: An Outsider Who's Out of It

My rejoinder is a response to two commentaries on my SEPI keynote in 1997: commentaries written by Goldfried and Cullari. Instead of grappling with the ideas I presented, both respondents were distracted by my satirical beginning. In my talk I proposed a method for studying psychotherapy integration. I am not pessimistic about the potential for integration, nor am I pessimistic about psychotherapy. But I am a skeptic, and science is driven—and indeed advance—by skepticism. In fact, psychotherapy integration requires that its advocates be skeptics. I still do not know what psychotherapy integration is, and remain confused. I can only conclude that I am not only an outsider, but out of it.