Summary
The paper addresses the currently heated debate of appropriate empirical research in psychotherapy. The contribution is in favor of so-called naturalistic approaches to the field of psychotherapy (effectiveness studies) which includes the objective evaluation of process-outcome relationships (practice-based evidence) instead of laboratory studies (efficacy studies). Very first preliminary data of the project provide the reader with ideas regarding meaningful research approaches to the complex field of psychotherapeutic change.
Zusammenfassung
Die Arbeit setzt sich mit der derzeitig kontrovers geführten Debatte um angemessene und notwendige Forschungsdesigns in der Psychotherapie auseinander und bezieht eindeutige Position für einen naturalistischen, prozess-outcome-orientierten Forschungsansatz (practice-based evidence). Am Beispiel des Designs und erster Ergebnisse der PAP-S-Studie der Schweizer Charta für Psychotherapie wird aufgezeigt, wie sinnvolle empirische Forschung in der Psychotherapie erfolgen kann.
Similar content being viewed by others
Literatur
Addis ME, Cardemil EV (2006) Psychotherapy manuals can improve outcomes. In: Norcross JC, Beutler LE, Levant RF (eds) Evidenz-based practices in mental health. Debate and dialogue on the fundamental questions. Washington, DC, pp 131–140
Assay TP, Lamber MJ (1999) The empirical case for the common factors in therapy: quantitative findings. In: Hubble MA, Duncan BL, Miller SD (eds) The heart and the soul of change: what works in therapy? Washinton, DC, pp 33–56
Beck AT (2000) Scientist at work. In: Beck AT (ed) Pragmatist embodies his no-nonsense therapy. New York Times, 11. Januar 2000
Brown J, Dreis S, Nace DK (1999) What really makes a difference in psychotherapy outcome? Why does managed care want to know? In: Hubble MA, Duncan BL, Miller SD (eds) The heart and the soul of change: what works in therapy? Washinton, DC, pp 389–406
Chambless DL, Sanderson WC, Shoham V, Johnson S, Pope K, Crits-Christoph P (1996) An update on empirically validated therapies. The Clinical Psychologist 49: 5–18
Duncan BL, Miller SD (2006) Treatment manuals do not improve outcomes. In: Norcross JC, Beutler LE, Levant RF (eds) Evidenz-based practices in mental health. Debate and dialogue on the fundamental questions. Washington, DC, pp 140–149
Eckert J (2010) Indikation und Prognose. In: Tschuschke V (Hrsg) Gruppenpsychotherapie. Von der Indikation zu Interventionstechniken. Stuttgart
Grünwald H, Tschuschke V, Schulthess P, Koemeda M, Schlegel M, Crameri A (2007) Praxisstudie Ambulante Psychotherapie – Schweiz (PAP-S). Projektbeschreibung. Unveröff. Manuskript
Henningsen P, Rudolf G (2000) Zur Bedeutung der Evidence-Based Medicine für die Psychotherapeutische Medizin. Psychotherapie, Psychosomatik, medizinische Psychologie 50: 366–375
Kriz J (2009) Wissenschaftliche Regeln, Redlichkeit und Diskursbereitschaft. Ein Blick hinter die Kulissen der politischen Bühne des "wissenschaftlichen Beirats für Psychotherapie". Jürgen Kriz im Gespräch mit Ulrich Sollmann. Psychotherapie Forum 17: 90–95
Lambert MJ, Ogles BM (2004) The efficacy and effectiveness of psychotherapy. In: Bergin and Garfield's Handbook of Psychotherapy and Behavior Change, 5th edn. New York, pp 139–193
Luborsky L, Diguer L, Seligman DA, Rosenthal R, Krause ED, Johnson S, Halperin G, Bishop M, Berman JS, Schweizer E (1999) The researcher's own therapy allegiances: A "wild card" in comparisons of treatment efficacy. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice 6: 95–106
Messer S (2004) Evidence-based practice: beyond empirically supported treatments. Professional Psychology: research and Practice 35: 580–588
Norcross JC, Beutler LE, Levant RF (eds) (2006) Evidenz-based practices in mental health. Debate and dialogue on the fundamental questions. Washington, DC
Reed GM (2006) Dialogue: convergence and contention. In: Norcross JC, Beutler LE, Levant RF (eds) Evidenz-based practices in mental health. Debate and dialogue on the fundamental questions. Washington, DC, pp 40–42
Shaw Austad C (1996) Is long-term psychotherapy unethical? Toward a social ethic in an era of managed care. San Francisco
Tschuschke V (2005) Psychotherapie in Zeiten evidenzbasierter Medizin. Fehlentwicklungen und Korrekturvorschläge. Psychotherapeutenjournal 4: 106–115
Wampold BE (2001) The Great Psychotherapy Debate. Hillsdale, NJ
Wampold BE, Mondin GW, Moody M, Stich F, Benson K, Ahn H (1997) A meta-analysis of outcome studies comparing bona fide psychotherapies: Empirically "all must have prizes". Psychological Bulletin 122: 203–215
Westen D, Morrison K (2001) The cure of souls: science, values and psychotherapy. San Francisco
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
About this article
Cite this article
Tschuschke, V., Crameri, A., Koemeda, M. et al. Psychotherapieforschung – Grundlegende Überlegungen und erste Ergebnisse der naturalistischen Psychotherapie-Studie ambulanter Behandlungen in der Schweiz (PAP-S). Psychotherapie Forum 17, 160 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00729-009-0300-7
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00729-009-0300-7
Keywords
- Psychotherapy research
- Efficacy versus effectiveness in psychotherapy
- Outpatient psychotherapy
- Efficacy research
- Effectiveness research
- Process-outcome research