2008
DOI: 10.1080/10503300802183702
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Patient interpersonal factors and the therapeutic alliance in two treatments for bulimia nervosa

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

3
57
0
5

Year Published

2011
2011
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 59 publications
(65 citation statements)
references
References 55 publications
3
57
0
5
Order By: Relevance
“…For example, there is some evidence that the therapeutic alliance grows slightly more across the course of interpersonal psychotherapy than across the course of CBT for bulimia nervosa. 41 The time point in therapy where the alliance is measured also has clinical relevance. 19 For example, a deterioration in the working alliance is associated with drop-out from therapy for anorexia nervosa, while a longer-term increase in that alliance is associated with completing the treatment.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, there is some evidence that the therapeutic alliance grows slightly more across the course of interpersonal psychotherapy than across the course of CBT for bulimia nervosa. 41 The time point in therapy where the alliance is measured also has clinical relevance. 19 For example, a deterioration in the working alliance is associated with drop-out from therapy for anorexia nervosa, while a longer-term increase in that alliance is associated with completing the treatment.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…When aligned with the defined patient and therapist roles, friendly-submissive patient behaviors can complement friendly-dominant therapist behavior and foster a good therapeutic alliance, whereas hostile-dominant patient behaviors are likely to be perceived by the therapist as mismatching the patient role (Kiesler, 1983;Kiesler & Watkins, 1989;Renner et al, 2012;Tracey, 1993). Accordingly in most studies, friendlysubmissive patient problems reported at intake related to a better therapeutic alliance (Constantino & Smith-Hansen, 2008;Muran, Segal, Samstag, & Crawford, 1994;Puschner, Bauer, Horowitz, & Kordy, 2005), whereas hostile-dominant problems predicted poorer relationship ratings (Connolly Gibbons et al, 2009;Muran et al, 1994;Puschner et al, 2005). More generally, high patient friendliness indicated a good therapeutic alliance and patient coldness a worse relationship, whereas too dominant interpersonal problems showed heterogeneous or even no association with the therapeutic alliance in these studies (e.g., Dinger, Strack, Leichsenring, & Schauenburg, 2007;Hersoug, Monsen, Havik, & Høglend, 2002).…”
mentioning
confidence: 90%
“…Moreover, IIP-C general distress factor has been associated with poor working alliance (Constantino and Smith-Hansen, 2008), whereas interpersonal problems in the friendly-submissive domain (i.e., low agency, high communion) have been associated with better alliance (Constantino and Smith-Hansen, 2008; Muran et al, 1994; Puschner et al, 2005). In contrast, Paivio & Bahr (1998) found that the IIP-C octant scales social avoidance and non-assertiveness, reflecting low agency and high communion, related negatively to working alliance.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%