Difference between revisions of "Keselman-Etal2018"

From emcawiki
Jump to: navigation, search
m (doi)
Line 3: Line 3:
 
|Author(s)=Henrich Keselman; Karin Osvaldsson Cromdal; Niclas Kullgard; Rolf Holmqvist
 
|Author(s)=Henrich Keselman; Karin Osvaldsson Cromdal; Niclas Kullgard; Rolf Holmqvist
 
|Title=Responding to mentalization invitations in psychotherapy sessions—A conversation analysis approach
 
|Title=Responding to mentalization invitations in psychotherapy sessions—A conversation analysis approach
|Tag(s)=EMCA; In Press; Psychotherapy; Invitations;  
+
|Tag(s)=EMCA; In Press; Psychotherapy; Invitations;
 
|Key=Keselman-Etal2016
 
|Key=Keselman-Etal2016
 
|Year=2016
 
|Year=2016
 
|Journal=Psychotherapy Research
 
|Journal=Psychotherapy Research
|URL=http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10503307.2016.1219422
+
|URL=http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10503307.2016.1219422
 
|DOI=http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10503307.2016.1219422
 
|DOI=http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10503307.2016.1219422
 
|Abstract=Objective: Increase in the capacity to mentalize has been proposed to be an important mechanism of change in psychotherapy. However, mentalization has primarily been studied as an individual skill that people either possess or lack, rather than as an interactional phenomenon. Method: In this study, excerpts from three different sessions in a therapy that aimed at increasing the patients mentalizing capacity were identified and studied using conversation analysis. Results: The analysis indicated that resistance to mentalizing may not only be due to lack of capacity but also may be seen as a linguistic resource in which this resistance demonstrates precisely the ability to mentalize. Conclusions: Consequences for psychotherapy practice and process research are discussed.
 
|Abstract=Objective: Increase in the capacity to mentalize has been proposed to be an important mechanism of change in psychotherapy. However, mentalization has primarily been studied as an individual skill that people either possess or lack, rather than as an interactional phenomenon. Method: In this study, excerpts from three different sessions in a therapy that aimed at increasing the patients mentalizing capacity were identified and studied using conversation analysis. Results: The analysis indicated that resistance to mentalizing may not only be due to lack of capacity but also may be seen as a linguistic resource in which this resistance demonstrates precisely the ability to mentalize. Conclusions: Consequences for psychotherapy practice and process research are discussed.
 
 
 
}}
 
}}

Revision as of 06:28, 27 September 2017

Keselman-Etal2018
BibType ARTICLE
Key Keselman-Etal2016
Author(s) Henrich Keselman, Karin Osvaldsson Cromdal, Niclas Kullgard, Rolf Holmqvist
Title Responding to mentalization invitations in psychotherapy sessions—A conversation analysis approach
Editor(s)
Tag(s) EMCA, In Press, Psychotherapy, Invitations
Publisher
Year 2016
Language
City
Month
Journal Psychotherapy Research
Volume
Number
Pages
URL Link
DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10503307.2016.1219422
ISBN
Organization
Institution
School
Type
Edition
Series
Howpublished
Book title
Chapter

Download BibTex

Abstract

Objective: Increase in the capacity to mentalize has been proposed to be an important mechanism of change in psychotherapy. However, mentalization has primarily been studied as an individual skill that people either possess or lack, rather than as an interactional phenomenon. Method: In this study, excerpts from three different sessions in a therapy that aimed at increasing the patients mentalizing capacity were identified and studied using conversation analysis. Results: The analysis indicated that resistance to mentalizing may not only be due to lack of capacity but also may be seen as a linguistic resource in which this resistance demonstrates precisely the ability to mentalize. Conclusions: Consequences for psychotherapy practice and process research are discussed.

Notes