A systematic research review of collaborative assessment methods.

Abstract

Collaborative assessment methods (CAMs) involve working with clients during all phases of the assessment process, from goal definition to interpretation of the testing results to the recommendations and conclusions. In this article, we define CAMs, provide clinical examples, and then meta-analyze the published literature to assess their effectiveness on distal treatment outcomes. Our meta-analytic results indicate that CAMs have positive effects on three outcome domains: a moderate effect on treatment processes, a small-to-moderate effect on personal growth, and a small effect on symptom reduction. There is little research evidence on the immediate, in-session effects of CAMs. We include diversity considerations, training implications. and therapeutic practices grounded in this research evidence.

Skills and methods that work in psychotherapy: Observations and conclusions from the special issue.

“…Collaborative assessment methods (CAMs) exert, in a couple of sessions, positive effects on distal treatment outcomes, but their primary mechanism of action may be a function of therapist respect, collaboration, and empathic understanding rather than in the exact sequence in which they are implemented. Moreover, CAMs tend to work best when therapists assist clients in developing a more compassionate and useful view of themselves (Aschieri et al, in press). Incorporate patient strengths into homework assignments (e.g., observation of positive episodes during a week, planning enjoyment) and in fostering activities outside of the therapy room (e.g., recreation, physical movement, social support).…”

“…Collaborative assessment methods (CAMs) exert, in a couple of sessions, positive effects on distal treatment outcomes, but their primary mechanism of action may be a function of therapist respect, collaboration, and empathic understanding rather than in the exact sequence in which they are implemented. Moreover, CAMs tend to work best when therapists assist clients in developing a more compassionate and useful view of themselves (Aschieri et al, in press).…”

“…These research reviews, along with a review of four skills/methods (affirmation/validation, self-disclosure, immediacy, rupture repair; Farber et al, in press) included in the task force on psychotherapy relationships that work (Norcross & Lambert, 2019), were recently published as chapters in Hill and Norcross (2023). In this special issue of Psychotherapy , we include abbreviated versions of 12 chapters (Aschieri et al, in press; Ezawa & Hollon, in press, Hill et al, in press; Levitt & Morrill, in press; McMullen & Tay, in press; Pascual-Leone & Baher, in press; Peluso & Freund, in press; Ryum et al, in press; Spangler & Sim, in press; Swift et al, in press; Williams, in press; Zilcha-Mano et al, in press). The remaining eight abbreviated versions of chapters (Atzil-Slonim et al, in press; Barkham et al, in press; Cuijpers et al, in press; Elliott et al, in press; Flückiger et al, 2023; Goldberg et al, in press; Iwakabe et al, in press; Overholser & Beale, 2023) appear in a companion special section of Psychotherapy Research .…”

Psychotherapy skills and methods: Introduction to the special issue.

“…The most widely accepted method for reviewing and aggregating results across quantitative research studies is meta-analyses (Appelbaum et al, 2018). Several meta-analyses are featured in this special issue (e.g., Aschieri et al, 2023; Elliott et al, in press; Ezawa & Hollon, 2023; Peluso & Freund, 2023; Spangler & Sim, 2023). Similarly, the most widely accepted method for summarizing qualitative research studies is meta-synthesis or qualitative meta-analyses (Levitt et al, 2018; Timulak & Creaner, 2023).…”