Jacobson N S, Schmaling K B, Holtzworth-Munroe A, Katt J L, Wood L F, Follette V M
Behav Res Ther. 1989;27(2):173-80. doi: 10.1016/0005-7967(89)90076-4.
The purpose of this study was to compare our structured research-based version of marital therapy from a social learning perspective with a clinically flexible version of the same treatment where treatment plans were individually-based and there was no specific number of treatment sessions. Thirty distressed married couples were randomly assigned to one of these two treatments. Assessment of outcome was based on global marital satisfaction, spouse reports of functioning in specific areas, and direct observational measures of communication. At posttest there were no differences in efficacy between structured and flexible treatments, although both treatments led to significant improvements. At a 6-month follow-up couples treated with the structured format were more likely to have deteriorated and flexibly treated couples were more likely to have maintained their treatment gains.
本研究的目的是将我们从社会学习视角出发基于结构化研究的婚姻治疗版本,与同一治疗方法的临床灵活版本进行比较。后者的治疗计划是个体化的,且治疗疗程数量不固定。30对婚姻关系困扰的夫妻被随机分配到这两种治疗方法中的一种。结果评估基于总体婚姻满意度、配偶在特定领域功能的报告以及沟通的直接观察指标。在后期测试中,结构化治疗和灵活治疗在疗效上没有差异,尽管两种治疗都带来了显著改善。在6个月的随访中,接受结构化治疗的夫妻病情更有可能恶化,而接受灵活治疗的夫妻更有可能维持治疗效果。