Research practices of marriage and family therapists

Johnson, Lee N.; Sandberg, Jonathan G.; Miller, Richard B.

doi:10.1080/019261899261952

Cited by 22 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The response rate was 22%, which is lower than average for national samples of MFTs (Doherty & Simmons, 1996;Johnson, Sandberg, & Miller, 1999). The low response rate is likely due to the one time mailing with no follow-up.…”

Section: Samplementioning

confidence: 67%

Emotion and Family Therapy: Exploring Female and Male Clinicians' Attitudes about the Use of Emotion in Therapy

Pace¹,

Sandberg²

2012

Journal of Systemic Therapies

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Emotion, as a main component in family therapy, enjoys empirical support and increasing popularity, yet little is known about the clinicians who are using theoretical models inclusive of emotion. In addition, even fewer studies have looked at the role of emotion in therapy, particularly in regard to gender differences among clinicians. In order to better understand the use of emotion in therapy, 221 marriage and family therapists (MFTs) completed self-report questionnaires about emotion as a main component in practicing family therapy (Emotion in Family Therapy Questionnaire, see Appendix) and demographic data. Results indicate that both female and male participants had favorable attitudes about emotion. No significant differences existed between men and women in this sample. None of the test variables were found to significantly relate to emotion for men. For women, confidence and prevalence using emotion were significantly related to age, relationship status, work setting, and having children. Implications for training and research are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Samplementioning

confidence: 67%

Emotion and Family Therapy: Exploring Female and Male Clinicians' Attitudes about the Use of Emotion in Therapy

Pace¹,

Sandberg²

2012

Journal of Systemic Therapies

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Additionally, we hoped to encourage clinicians in private and agency practices to consider ways in which their work might translate naturally into publishable research, thereby helping to bridge the clinician-researcher gap (Johnson, Sandberg, & Miller, 1999). We would hope that upon reading this article and some of the publications it surveys, clinicians who have never felt their work was "worthy" of publication might be motivated to examine their practices for proof of effectiveness and publish the results using one of the …”

Section: Implications For Practicementioning

confidence: 98%

Alternative Methodologies in Research Literature Review: Links Between Clinical Work and MFT Effectiveness

Addison¹,

Sandberg²,

Corby³

et al. 2002

The American Journal of Family Therapy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Traditionally, "good outcome research" has referred to laboratorybased, controlled studies that report the efficacy of a given treatment on a specific population. Although useful and needed in the struggle to establish MFTs as accepted mental health service providers, this type of research does not address whether MFT is effective in "real world" settings. In order to highlight the clinical and professional relevance of existing effectiveness research, this article reviews 15 years of clinical research in three major family therapy journals. The results suggest that 1) MFT effectiveness is under-represented in major review articles, 2) clinicians can use a variety of methodologies to establish the effectiveness of their work, and 3) more research is needed that investigates how and why MFT works in "real world" settings. Implications for practice and future research are discussed.

show abstract

“…Often research articles are not written in ways research‐novice clinicians can understand. As a result, the majority of MFTs largely ignore professional scholarly journals (Johnson, Sandberg, & Miller, 1999).…”

Section: The Scientist‐practitioner Model Versus the Research‐informementioning

confidence: 99%

The Research‐Informed Clinician: A Guide to Training the Next‐Generation MFT

Karam

Sprenkle

2010

J Marital Family Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The gap between clinical research and practice is a major challenge facing marriage and family therapy (MFT) training programs. Until now, the answer to bridge this gap has primarily been the Boulder Scientist-Practitioner Model. Although realistic for doctoral students, it may not be a good fit for MFT master's students who have primarily clinical career ambitions-which we believe is a legitimate and positive career choice. The following article articulates a "research informed" perspective as opposed to the scientist-practitioner framework as a research-training model for clinically oriented MFT master's programs. After articulating the similarities and differences between these two approaches, the authors outline 10 practical ideas to integrate research into programs that desire to remain clinical in focus, but also research informed.

show abstract

Research practices of marriage and family therapists

Cited by 22 publications

References 14 publications

Emotion and Family Therapy: Exploring Female and Male Clinicians' Attitudes about the Use of Emotion in Therapy

Emotion and Family Therapy: Exploring Female and Male Clinicians' Attitudes about the Use of Emotion in Therapy

Alternative Methodologies in Research Literature Review: Links Between Clinical Work and MFT Effectiveness

The Research‐Informed Clinician: A Guide to Training the Next‐Generation MFT

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About