Reflections under the lens: observations of a systemic therapist on the experience of participation and scrutiny in a research project

The London Depression Intervention Trial (LDIT) was set up in the early 1990s by Professor Julian Leff ( Leff et al., 2000 , and in this issue) to compare the relative efficacy and costs, in work with depressed adults, of systemic couple therapy, drug treatment and individual cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT). The research found that systemic therapy compared favourably with the other modalities in respect of fewer drop‐outs, improvement in measured depression at the end of therapy and on follow‐up after a second year without therapy, and was not – contrary to the usual assumptions – more expensive. I was one of the two therapists, together with Eia Asen ( Jones and Asen, 2000 , and Asen in this issue) practising systemic therapy with diagnosed depressed patients and their partners. In this paper I will discuss the experience of being the object of research scrutiny, and the reflections that have come to me during and subsequent to the research period. To put it more challengingly: What are the consequences for systemic psychotherapists of co‐operation with researchers? Can a circular epistemology survive being scrutinized through a lineal grid?