Raue P J, Goldfried M R, Barkham M
Department of Psychology, New York Hospital-Cornell Medical Center, White Plains 10605, USA.
J Consult Clin Psychol. 1997 Aug;65(4):582-7. doi: 10.1037//0022-006x.65.4.582.
The quality of the therapeutic alliance was compared in sessions of psychodynamic-interpersonal and cognitive-behavioral therapy, and the alliance's relationship to various session impacts was investigated. As part of the Sheffield Psychotherapy Project 2 (D. A. Shapiro, M. Barkham, A. Rees, G. E. Hardy, S. Reynolds, & M. Startup, 1994), 57 clients diagnosed with major depression received 16 sessions of either psychodynamic-interpersonal or cognitive-behavioral therapy. Coders used the Working Alliance Inventory to rate 1 high-impact and 1 low-impact session from each client. Results indicated significantly greater alliance scores for cognitive-behavioral therapy sessions on the whole. Also, for the samples as a whole, high-impact sessions were characterized by higher alliance scores than those for low-impact sessions, and alliance was positively related to therapists' ratings of session depth and smoothness and to clients' ratings of mood.
对心理动力人际治疗和认知行为治疗疗程中的治疗联盟质量进行了比较,并研究了该联盟与各种疗程影响之间的关系。作为谢菲尔德心理治疗项目2(D. A. 夏皮罗、M. 巴克姆、A. 里斯、G. E. 哈迪、S. 雷诺兹和M. 斯塔特普,1994年)的一部分,57名被诊断为重度抑郁症的患者接受了16次心理动力人际治疗或认知行为治疗。编码员使用工作联盟量表对每位患者的1次高影响力疗程和1次低影响力疗程进行评分。结果表明,总体而言,认知行为治疗疗程的联盟得分显著更高。此外,对于整个样本,高影响力疗程的特点是联盟得分高于低影响力疗程,并且联盟与治疗师对疗程深度和平顺度的评分以及患者对情绪的评分呈正相关。