Paradoxical intention strategies: A review of rationales.

Abstract

This article summarizes contributions to the paradoxical perspective made by psychoanalysts, family therapists, logotherapists, Adlerian, and Morita therapists. In the analysis, six categories of rationales offered by these writers are deduced: overcoming resistance, disturbing systems, altering client perspectives, reversing excessive effort, learning theory, and intrapsychic factors such as disorientation or reframing. Attention is drawn to the fact that no information from clients is presented to substantiate any rationale; caution in accepting them is therefore advised.

Paradoxical Thinking Interventions: A Paradigm for Societal Change

“…Based on different clinical psychological theories (e.g., Frankl, ; Miller & Rollnick, ; Riebel, ; Watzlawick et al., ), as well as on the classic debating technique, reductio ad absurdum (Rescher, ), we define paradoxical thinking as a method of using a new nonjudgmental message(s) that is consistent with held attitudes and beliefs, i.e., falls within the message recipient's latitude of acceptance, but is provided in an amplified, exaggerated or even absurd manner. It is meant to elicit surprise, or a sense of absurdity regarding the held attitudes or the current situation, and will be especially effective among those who would normally be the most resistant.…”

“…Most of the early evidence of the effectiveness of paradoxical thinking interventions comes from the clinical psychological literature. This work (e.g., Frankl, ; Miller & Rollnick, ; Watzlawick et al., ; for a review see Riebel, ) suggest that individuals who are provided with amplified or exaggerated information or instructions that are in line with their held beliefs, attitudes, or behavior may change these beliefs, even when they are extremely negative and well entrenched. Using a similar line of thought, Frankl () advised his patients that, instead of avoiding the fear‐arousing stimulus, to think about very fearful cases, or in his words, “to do, or wish to happen, the very things [they fear]” (Frankl, , p. 227).…”

The language of therapy.

“…This practice means that if "withdrawing" were to be relabeled "taking care of oneself," and "controlling" were to become "structuring one's environment," clients would often be better motivated to alter current maladaptive behavior (Weeks & L'Abate, 1982). The various rationales and strategies underlying paradoxical approaches have been reviewed by Riebel (1984). Again, empirical studies have yielded mixed results: Feldman et al (1982) found that paradoxical interpretation yielded more symptom remission than directives did, but findings by Lopez & Wambach (1982) were less conclusive.…”

Paradoxical Interventions: A Review of the Recent Literature

“…As interest in paradoxical techniques has steadily grown over the last several years, they have received increasing attention in the professional literature, with most of this attention being aimed at describing paradoxical techniques and what makes them work (Cade, 1984;Driscoll, 1985;Kercher & Smith, 1985;O'Connell, 1983;Omer, 1981;Riebel, 1984;Zeig, 1980). In addition to this descriptive/explanatory body of literature on paradox, there has also been a slowly accumulating body of experimental outcome studies.…”