Suppr超能文献

循证心理干预与共同因素方法:二者开始和解了吗?

Evidence-based psychological interventions and the common factors approach: the beginnings of a rapprochement?

作者信息

Hofmann Stefan G, Barlow David H

机构信息

Department of Psychology.

出版信息

Psychotherapy (Chic). 2014 Dec;51(4):510-3. doi: 10.1037/a0037045. Epub 2014 Aug 11.

Abstract

Laska, Gurman, and Wampold (2014, pp. 467-481) argue that common factors (CFs) have largely been ignored by clinical researchers developing research-based interventions but that CFs are primarily responsible for therapeutic change. On the contrary, many clinical researchers developing empirically supported treatments have been studying the contribution of these factors for decades. What has been demonstrated is that these factors are contributory, but are not sufficient to produce maximum effects and their impact differs greatly from disorder to disorder. But we also take note of a change of tone and perhaps substance from these authors on the contribution of CFs to evidence-based psychological interventions, and reflect on recent changes in our own views both of which may reduce differences in our respective positions.

摘要

拉斯卡、古曼和万波尔德(2014年,第467 - 481页)认为,在开发基于研究的干预措施时,临床研究人员很大程度上忽略了共同因素(CFs),但这些共同因素是治疗变化的主要原因。相反,许多开发循证治疗方法的临床研究人员已经对这些因素的作用进行了数十年的研究。已经证明的是,这些因素有一定作用,但不足以产生最大效果,而且它们的影响因疾病不同而有很大差异。但我们也注意到这些作者在共同因素对循证心理干预的贡献方面语气甚至可能实质内容的变化,并反思我们自己观点最近的变化,这两者可能会缩小我们各自立场的差异。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验