The great psychotherapy debate : models, methods, and findings
著者
書誌事項
The great psychotherapy debate : models, methods, and findings
L. Erlbaum Associates, 2001
- : cloth : alk. paper
大学図書館所蔵 全3件
  青森
  岩手
  宮城
  秋田
  山形
  福島
  茨城
  栃木
  群馬
  埼玉
  千葉
  東京
  神奈川
  新潟
  富山
  石川
  福井
  山梨
  長野
  岐阜
  静岡
  愛知
  三重
  滋賀
  京都
  大阪
  兵庫
  奈良
  和歌山
  鳥取
  島根
  岡山
  広島
  山口
  徳島
  香川
  愛媛
  高知
  福岡
  佐賀
  長崎
  熊本
  大分
  宮崎
  鹿児島
  沖縄
  韓国
  中国
  タイ
  イギリス
  ドイツ
  スイス
  フランス
  ベルギー
  オランダ
  スウェーデン
  ノルウェー
  アメリカ
注記
Includes bibliographical references (p. 233-246) and indexes
内容説明・目次
内容説明
The Great Psychotherapy Debate: Models, Methods, and Findings comprehensively reviews the research on psychotherapy to dispute the commonly held view that the benefits of psychotherapy are derived from the specific ingredients contained in a given treatment (medical model). The author reviews the literature related to the absolute efficacy of psychotherapy, the relative efficacy of various treatments, the specificity of ingredients contained in established therapies, effects due to common factors, such as the working alliance, adherence and allegiance to the therapeutic protocol, and effects that are produced by different therapists. In each case, the evidence convincingly corroborates the contextual model and disconfirms the prevailing medical model.
目次
Contents: Foreword. Preface. Competing Meta-Models: The Medical Model Versus the Contextual Model. Differential Hypotheses and Evidentiary Rules. Absolute Efficacy: The Benefits of Psychotherapy Established by Meta-Analysis. Relative Efficacy: The Dodo Bird Was Smarter Than We Have Been Led to Believe. Specific Effects: Weak Empirical Evidence That Benefits of Psychotherapy Are Derived From Specific Ingredients. General Effects: The Alliance as a Case in Point. Allegiance and Adherence: Further Evidence for the Contextual Model. Therapist Effects: An Ignored but Critical Factor. Implications of Rejecting the Medical Model.
「Nielsen BookData」 より