Department of Psychology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2012 Mar 2;9:23. doi: 10.1186/1479-5868-9-23.
Clinical interventions can be developed through two distinct pathways. In the first, which we call top-down, a well-articulated theory drives the development of the intervention, whereas in the case of a bottom-up approach, clinical experience, more so than a dedicated theoretical perspective, drives the intervention. Using this dialectic, this paper discusses Self-Determination Theory (SDT) 12 and Motivational Interviewing (MI) 3 as prototypical examples of a top-down and bottom-up approaches, respectively. We sketch the different starting points, foci and developmental processes of SDT and MI, but equally note the complementary character and the potential for systematic integration between both approaches. Nevertheless, for a deeper integration to take place, we contend that MI researchers might want to embrace autonomy as a fundamental basic process underlying therapeutic change and we discuss the advantages of doing so.
临床干预可以通过两种不同的途径来开发。在第一种途径中,我们称之为自上而下,一个精心阐述的理论驱动干预的发展,而在自下而上的方法中,临床经验,而不是专门的理论观点,驱动干预。本文使用这种辩证方法,分别将自我决定理论(SDT)和动机性访谈(MI)作为自上而下和自下而上方法的典型例子进行讨论。我们概述了 SDT 和 MI 的不同起点、焦点和发展过程,但同样注意到两种方法的互补性和系统整合的潜力。然而,为了实现更深层次的整合,我们认为 MI 研究人员可能希望将自主性作为治疗变化的基本基本过程,并讨论了这样做的好处。