| Abstract: | In this commentary, I advance the view that the scientist-practitioner gap is partly due to the research designs commonly used in psychotherapy research. Specifically, I believe that randomized controlled trials, which are important for establishing treatment efficacy and as leverage when making the case for the value of psychotherapy in relation to various stakeholders, are limited for further development of clinical theories. Instead, I find recent advances in cross-lagged panel modeling to be both clinically intuitive and stronger for causal inference than most other nonexperimental designs. In addition to discussing causal inference and clinical interpretation of cross-lagged panel models, I discuss the potential of improving mediation analysis, personalization of research, and studying issues of clinical timing. Finally, I briefly discuss some limitations of cross-lagged panel models. It is my belief that the use of these data analytic advances can make empirical research better live up to the innovations in Beck’s work. |
