Suppr超能文献

所有人都赢了就都必须有奖吗?重新审视卢伯斯基等人的定论。

Have all won and must all have prizes? Revisiting Luborsky et al.'s verdict.

作者信息

Beutler L E

机构信息

Graduate School of Education, University of California, Santa Barbara 93106.

出版信息

J Consult Clin Psychol. 1991 Apr;59(2):226-32. doi: 10.1037//0022-006x.59.2.226.

Abstract

Although most reviews of comparative psychotherapy literature have failed to find significant differences among treatments, it is premature to give up the search for differential effects. There are a large number of patient, therapist, and treatment variables that may mediate the effects of treatments. Given the enormity of the task of exploring potential interactions among the many patient, therapist, and psychotherapy types, a guiding model is needed by which to narrow our search for variables that mediate between treatment type and outcome. However, theoretical constructs that represent both patient and therapy variations frequently are poorly defined. Tests of treatment selection models that cut across narrow theoretical differences among psychotherapies and that operationalize definitions of patient types hold promise for revealing meaningful Patient x Therapist interaction effects in psychotherapy.

摘要

尽管大多数比较心理治疗文献的综述未能发现不同治疗方法之间存在显著差异,但现在就放弃寻找差异效应还为时过早。有大量的患者、治疗师和治疗变量可能会调节治疗效果。鉴于探索众多患者、治疗师和心理治疗类型之间潜在相互作用的任务艰巨,需要一个指导模型来缩小我们对调节治疗类型与结果之间关系的变量的搜索范围。然而,代表患者和治疗差异的理论结构往往定义不明确。跨越心理治疗之间狭隘理论差异并对患者类型定义进行操作化的治疗选择模型测试,有望揭示心理治疗中患者与治疗师之间有意义的相互作用效应。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验