The experiences and challenges of psychotherapists working remotely during the coronavirus pandemic were explored using a mixed‐methods approach. An online survey completed by 335 psychotherapists produced both quantitative and qualitative data with the latter being subject to a reflexive thematic analysis. Large numbers of therapists were using video‐link platforms and the telephone to conduct client sessions. A majority of therapists felt challenged by remote working, with reduced interpersonal cues, feelings of isolation and fatigue, and technical issues frequently cited concerns. At the same time, most therapists considered that remote working had been effective and that clients were comfortable with the process. Two‐thirds of therapists indicated that remote working would now become core business for them. The great majority of therapists thought that remote working skills should be part of formal therapy trainings.

Background Examining the motivations of psychotherapists has not been a popular topic of systematic research. Knowing why people want to become therapists is clearly important because this factor will inevitably impact on therapeutic outcomes. The absence of research‐led knowledge on therapists′ motivations allows this key issue to remain a relatively unattended focus within reflective practice and personal development. Aim To collect data about therapists′ motivations from a large number of practitioners so that core findings could be generalised to the wider profession. Method A total of 540 psychotherapists completed an online survey with significant numbers offering supporting qualitative data. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Qualitative data were subject to thematic and textual analysis. Results A large majority of therapists believe that their career choice was influenced by unconscious motivations, that their motivations are likely to change over time and that their own psychic wounds can contribute to effective therapy. Conclusion Psychotherapists are clearly prepared to reflect, in depth, on why they have been drawn to the profession. The fact that an awareness of therapists′ motivations may be variable that they may change over time and can be linked to personal vulnerability suggests that the topic should be an integral part of practitioners′ ongoing personal development and a discrete focus in formal training programmes.

Research frequently addresses a gap between practice and research in the field of psychotherapy. Castonguay et al (2010) suggest that the practice of many full-time psychotherapists is rarely or nonsubstantially influenced by research. Boisvert and Faust (2005) ask ‘why do psychotherapists not rely on the research to consistently inform their practice?’ and suggest that concerns ‘have echoed through the decades’ about psychotherapists’ failings to integrate of research and practice. This study focuses on therapists’ (counsellors and psychotherapists) reasoning about their engagement with ‘research’ as described in dissertations and in personal, anonymously presented documents, research journals and interviews included. The study focuses on the stages which generally are referred to as ‘data analysis’, which in this study refers research stages where interpretation typically is required with synthesising and analysing in mind. Turning our attention to the therapists’ ‘narrative knowing’ about research during these stages where generating own new knowledge is put to the forefront, have highlighted a complex relationship involving epistemological discrepancies, real or imagined, between practice and research. It also highlighted gender issues, culture and commonly held constructs about what constitutes a ‘counsellor’, which we believe influence therapists’ presence in research. We decided to include the citation “Therapists have a lot to add to the field of research, but many don’t make it there” in the title to illustrate some of the complexity. The study is based on a Professional Doctorate programme, which engages with psychologists, counsellors and psychotherapists in practice-based research. In addition to drawing from dissertations already in the public domain students and graduates from the doctoral programme were invited to contribute their own embodied experiences from ‘doing’ a data analysis. The paper suggests a hybrid for narrative analysis, discussing the options to (re-)present narratives guided by a combined interest into the unique, personal whilst also looking for ‘themes’ within and across these narratives.

Background References are frequently made to a strained relationship between therapeutic practice and research. This study has developed in response this critique. Aims This study aims to explore therapists’ views on the relationship between research and clinical practice, guided by some of the following questions; What sort of relationship do therapists feel that they have with research? What amount of formal research training do therapists have? To what extent do therapists feel that their own research is valued? To what extent does research inform therapists’ clinical practice? Methodology The study is anchored in mixed‐methods framework (Hesse‐Biber, 2010; Priest, 2013) drawing from a survey (n = 92) distributed within and outside the UK and coupled with interviews (n = 9) approached within a narrative thematic framework. Findings Both the survey and interviews suggested a sense of “homelessness” for researchers in the field of therapy. Obstacles were referred to within and outside the therapeutic community. Some referred to little training, and many felt unsupported among colleagues and employers when pursuing research. One therapist said “The scientists and researchers I work with; they know they have a career in research – you get rewarded and promoted. That kind of recognition doesn't exist in therapy.” Implications To meet the increased requirements of research‐supported practice, the study suggests that more systematic efforts are required to support psychotherapists’ engagement in research activities.