Buchholz2019

From emcawiki
Revision as of 07:14, 19 November 2019 by ElliottHoey (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Michael B. Buchholz; |Title=Psychodynamic Psychotherapy Process Research: A quick ride through what you should know about process (resea...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search
Buchholz2019
BibType ARTICLE
Key Buchholz2019
Author(s) Michael B. Buchholz
Title Psychodynamic Psychotherapy Process Research: A quick ride through what you should know about process (research)
Editor(s)
Tag(s) EMCA, Psychotherapy process research, Psychotherapy, Methodology
Publisher
Year 2019
Language English
City
Month
Journal The Journal of Analytical Psychology
Volume 64
Number 5
Pages 798-822
URL Link
DOI https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5922.12547
ISBN
Organization
Institution
School
Type
Edition
Series
Howpublished
Book title
Chapter

Download BibTex

Abstract

This paper gives an overview of psychoanalytic process research, which brings to light the complexity of psychotherapy sessions. This complexity is so rich that many instruments intended to make the process measurable failed in the past because they initially used a strategy of complexity reduction. This method however did not help to further our understanding of the complexity involved. Three former presidents of the Society for Psychotherapy Research (Stiles, Hill, Elliot 2015) decided to solve the following equivalence paradox: many therapies work successfully though they all follow different theories, produce a heterogeneity of processes and often enough a misfit between what theories maintain to be a good process and their realization in the treatment room. As theories are often compared to maps, a driver would wonder which route to take. But therapists‐as‐drivers go undaunted ‐ and nevertheless achieve their goals together with their patients. Norcross and Wampold (2018) found that good therapists invent new therapies with every new patient. They hypothesize that it is because of conversation. This is in accord with the 3 former presidents’ proposal to return to detailed single case analyses including the micro‐analytic power of conversation analysis of which a few insights are outlined in this article.

Notes