Psychotherapie und wissenschaft - Harmonie oder dissonanz?

1Citations
Citations of this article
9Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Clinical practice and psychotherapy research are often perceived as areas of conflict with little common ground. Despite substantial empirical progress over the last few decades, research findings frequently play only a minor role in clinical decision making or treatment selection. Instead, clinical psychologists often trust their own clinical judgment, which may lead, for example, to an underestimation of the likelihood of treatment failures. In clinical practice, flexible treatments are often preferred over standardized interventions, based, for example, on the assumption that the latter ones will not be accepted by clinical patients. However, in addition to providing compelling evidence for their effectiveness, recent data suggest that patients highly appreciate standardized interventions such as structured clinical interviews. Recent research has shown that research-oriented training programs enhance the acceptance of evidence-based treatments by therapists as well as therapeutic outcomes. To facilitate the dissemination of research findings, psychotherapy researchers need to make their findings more easily accessible to practitioners, and training programs for clinical psychologists should be research based. © 2012 Verlag Hans Huber, Hogrefe AG.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Seehagen, S., Pflug, V., & Schneider, S. (2012). Psychotherapie und wissenschaft - Harmonie oder dissonanz? Zeitschrift Fur Kinder- Und Jugendpsychiatrie Und Psychotherapie. https://doi.org/10.1024/1422-4917/a000186

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free