Difference between revisions of "Voutilainen-etal2018a"

From emcawiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Liisa Voutilainen; Pentti Henttonen; Mikko Kahri; Niklas Ravaja; Mikko Sams; Anssi Peräkylä; |Title=Empathy, Challenge, and Psychophys...")
 
 
Line 2: Line 2:
 
|BibType=ARTICLE
 
|BibType=ARTICLE
 
|Author(s)=Liisa Voutilainen; Pentti Henttonen; Mikko Kahri; Niklas Ravaja; Mikko Sams; Anssi Peräkylä;
 
|Author(s)=Liisa Voutilainen; Pentti Henttonen; Mikko Kahri; Niklas Ravaja; Mikko Sams; Anssi Peräkylä;
|Title=Empathy, Challenge, and Psychophysiological Activation in Therapist–Client Interaction
+
|Title=Empathy, challenge, and psychophysiological activation in therapist–client interaction
 
|Tag(s)=EMCA; empathy; challenge; psychotherapy; psychophysiology; social interaction; autonomic nervous system activation
 
|Tag(s)=EMCA; empathy; challenge; psychotherapy; psychophysiology; social interaction; autonomic nervous system activation
 
|Key=Voutilainen-etal2018a
 
|Key=Voutilainen-etal2018a
Line 9: Line 9:
 
|Journal=Frontiers in Psychology
 
|Journal=Frontiers in Psychology
 
|Volume=9
 
|Volume=9
|Number=530
+
|Pages=Article 530
|DOI=doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00530
+
|URL=https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00530/full
|Abstract=Two central dimensions in psychotherapeutic work are a therapist’s empathy
+
|DOI=10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00530
with clients and challenging their judgments. We investigated how they influence
+
|Abstract=Two central dimensions in psychotherapeutic work are a therapist’s empathy with clients and challenging their judgments. We investigated how they influence psychophysiological responses in the participants. Data were from psychodynamic therapy sessions, 24 sessions from 5 dyads, from which 694 therapist’s interventions were coded. Heart rate and electrodermal activity (EDA) of the participants were used to index emotional arousal. Facial muscle activity (electromyography) was used to index positive and negative emotional facial expressions. Electrophysiological data were analyzed in two time frames: (a) during the therapists’ interventions and (b) across the whole psychotherapy session. Both empathy and challenge had an effect on psychophysiological responses in the participants. Therapists’ empathy decreased clients’ and increased their own EDA across the session. Therapists’ challenge increased their own EDA in response to the interventions, but not across the sessions. Clients, on the other hand, did not respond to challenges during interventions, but challenges tended to increase EDA across a session. Furthermore, there was an interaction effect between empathy and challenge. Heart rate decreased and positive facial expressions increased in sessions where empathy and challenge were coupled, i.e., the amount of both empathy and challenge was either high or low. This suggests that these two variables work together. The results highlight the therapeutic functions and interrelation of empathy and challenge, and in line with the dyadic system theory by Beebe and Lachmann (2002), the systemic linkage between interactional expression and individual regulation of emotion.
psychophysiological responses in the participants. Data were from psychodynamic
 
therapy sessions, 24 sessions from 5 dyads, from which 694 therapist’s interventions
 
were coded. Heart rate and electrodermal activity (EDA) of the participants were
 
used to index emotional arousal. Facial muscle activity (electromyography) was used
 
to index positive and negative emotional facial expressions. Electrophysiological data
 
were analyzed in two time frames: (a) during the therapists’ interventions and (b)
 
across the whole psychotherapy session. Both empathy and challenge had an effect
 
on psychophysiological responses in the participants. Therapists’ empathy decreased
 
clients’ and increased their own EDA across the session. Therapists’ challenge
 
increased their own EDA in response to the interventions, but not across the sessions.
 
Clients, on the other hand, did not respond to challenges during interventions, but
 
challenges tended to increase EDA across a session. Furthermore, there was an
 
interaction effect between empathy and challenge. Heart rate decreased and positive
 
facial expressions increased in sessions where empathy and challenge were coupled,
 
i.e., the amount of both empathy and challenge was either high or low. This suggests
 
that these two variables work together. The results highlight the therapeutic functions
 
and interrelation of empathy and challenge, and in line with the dyadic system theory
 
by Beebe and Lachmann (2002), the systemic linkage between interactional expression
 
and individual regulation of emotion.
 
 
}}
 
}}

Latest revision as of 05:52, 11 January 2020

Voutilainen-etal2018a
BibType ARTICLE
Key Voutilainen-etal2018a
Author(s) Liisa Voutilainen, Pentti Henttonen, Mikko Kahri, Niklas Ravaja, Mikko Sams, Anssi Peräkylä
Title Empathy, challenge, and psychophysiological activation in therapist–client interaction
Editor(s)
Tag(s) EMCA, empathy, challenge, psychotherapy, psychophysiology, social interaction, autonomic nervous system activation
Publisher
Year 2018
Language English
City
Month
Journal Frontiers in Psychology
Volume 9
Number
Pages Article 530
URL Link
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00530
ISBN
Organization
Institution
School
Type
Edition
Series
Howpublished
Book title
Chapter

Download BibTex

Abstract

Two central dimensions in psychotherapeutic work are a therapist’s empathy with clients and challenging their judgments. We investigated how they influence psychophysiological responses in the participants. Data were from psychodynamic therapy sessions, 24 sessions from 5 dyads, from which 694 therapist’s interventions were coded. Heart rate and electrodermal activity (EDA) of the participants were used to index emotional arousal. Facial muscle activity (electromyography) was used to index positive and negative emotional facial expressions. Electrophysiological data were analyzed in two time frames: (a) during the therapists’ interventions and (b) across the whole psychotherapy session. Both empathy and challenge had an effect on psychophysiological responses in the participants. Therapists’ empathy decreased clients’ and increased their own EDA across the session. Therapists’ challenge increased their own EDA in response to the interventions, but not across the sessions. Clients, on the other hand, did not respond to challenges during interventions, but challenges tended to increase EDA across a session. Furthermore, there was an interaction effect between empathy and challenge. Heart rate decreased and positive facial expressions increased in sessions where empathy and challenge were coupled, i.e., the amount of both empathy and challenge was either high or low. This suggests that these two variables work together. The results highlight the therapeutic functions and interrelation of empathy and challenge, and in line with the dyadic system theory by Beebe and Lachmann (2002), the systemic linkage between interactional expression and individual regulation of emotion.

Notes