Comparative Studies of Psychotherapies

Luborsky, Lester

doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1975.01760260059004

Cited by 1,362 publications

(305 citation statements)

References 77 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

261

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…After reviewing the psychotherapy outcome literatures of the time, Rosenzweig (1936), and subsequently Luborsky, Singer, and Luborsky (1975), reached the conclusion of the Dodo bird in Alice in Wonderland: "Everybody has won, and all must have prizes." Outcomes for different therapies were surprisingly equivalent, and no form of psychotherapy proved superior to any other.…”

Section: The Flight Of the Dodomentioning

confidence: 99%

The Efficacy of Psychodynamic Psychotherapy

Shedler

2011

Psychodynamic Psychotherapy Research

139

153

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: The Flight Of the Dodomentioning

confidence: 99%

The Efficacy of Psychodynamic Psychotherapy

Shedler

2011

Psychodynamic Psychotherapy Research

139

153

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…One possible explanation for the striking differences in the direction of effects between two treatments as in the EMDR-CBT comparison by Bisson and Andrew [23] is the presence of researchers' preferences for one over the other treatment, the so-called researcher allegiance [50]. Accordingly, the intriguing pattern of results in the EMDR-CBT meta-analysis by Bisson and Andrew [23] could simply be explained by the fact that in one half of the studies researchers preferred CBT and in the other half researchers preferred EMDR.…”

Section: Moderators In Comparative Ptsd Rctsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Outcome Research: Why Moderators Should not be Neglected

Gerger¹,

Gaab²

2016

A Multidimensional Approach to Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder - From Theory to Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several psychotherapeutic treatments have been developed over the years for treating the symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). But it remains still unclear which components of the complex treatment packages are necessary and most beneficial for PTSD symptom improvement. In PTSD outcome research, the randomized controlled trial (RCT) design has been applied in order to address this issue. However, meta-analyses repeatedly reported considerable variation between results from individual RCTs (i.e. between-study heterogeneity). Attempts to explain such heterogeneity led to the identification of relevant moderators of treatment effects in PTSD RCTs. This study presents meta-analytic findings, which show that factors, which are not part of the treatment (such as the investigators' preferences for a particular treatment or the complexity of the patients' clinical problems), impact on outcome in PTSD RCTs. We show that considering extra-therapeutic moderators in meta-analyses on PTSD RCTs may impact the conclusions and recommendations that may be deduced. The summarized findings confirm the notion that no PTSD treatment consistently outperforms the others and strengthen the position that even non-trauma-focused treatments may be beneficial PTSD treatments.

show abstract

“…However, establishing causality does not explain how the change occurred, and it does not necessarily follow that the components that are hypothesized to be effective are the actual agents of change. Meta-analytic and outcome studies repeatedly demonstrate that it is common factors that are more effective than treatment-specific factors (e.g., Elkin, 1994;Luborsky, Singer, & Luborsky, 1975;Wampold, 2001). In addition, studies have shown that phenomena such as early session gains (Ilardi & Craighead, 1994) and sudden gains (Busch, Kanter, Landes, & Kohlenberg, 2006;Morgan, Roberts, & Ciesla, 2005), that indicate mechanisms of change other than the ones that were hypothesized by the theory, were at work.…”

Section: Mechanisms Of Changementioning

confidence: 99%

Competing Models of Evidence and Corroborating Research Strategies: Shaping the Landscape of Psychotherapy Research in the Era of Evidence-Based Practice

Iwakabe

2013

PSYCHOLOGIA -An International Journal of Psychological Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Empirically supported treatments have brought much enthusiasm for establishing a firm empirical basis for clinical practice. However controversies about what constitutes evidence in psychotherapy and what research methodologies qualify as sufficiently rigorous to produce such evidence also abound. Although most psychotherapy researchers are in agreement with the underlying rationale that psychotherapy should be based on rigorous scientific research, many are in disagreement as to what constitutes ideal scientific practice in evidence-based psychotherapy; alternative frameworks of evidence have been proposed. This paper first reviews different models of evidence, namely empirically supported treatments, empirically supported psychotherapy relationships, research informed principles of therapeutic change, and evidence-based practice in psychology, and discusses their relative strengths and limitations. Secondly, it illustrates three research topics and corresponding strategies that both supplement these evidence models and deepen an understanding of process and outcome in psychotherapy. These three areas are: mechanisms of change, systematic case studies, and researcher-practitioner collaboration.

show abstract

Comparative Studies of Psychotherapies

Cited by 1,362 publications

References 77 publications

The Efficacy of Psychodynamic Psychotherapy

The Efficacy of Psychodynamic Psychotherapy

Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Outcome Research: Why Moderators Should not be Neglected

Competing Models of Evidence and Corroborating Research Strategies: Shaping the Landscape of Psychotherapy Research in the Era of Evidence-Based Practice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About