The Therapy Relationship in IPT: Elements, Functions, and Findings Gregory G. Kolden, Ph.D. Gregory G. Kolden, Ph.D. University of Wisconsin – Madison University of Wisconsin – Madison Department of Psychiatry Department of Psychiatry [email protected]4 th th International Conference on Interpersonal Psychotherapy International Conference on Interpersonal Psychotherapy Amsterdam, the Netherlands Amsterdam, the Netherlands June 23, 2011 June 23, 2011
28
Embed
The Therapy Relationship in IPT: Elements, Functions, and Findings Gregory G. Kolden, Ph.D. University of Wisconsin – Madison Department of Psychiatry.
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
The Therapy Relationship in IPT:Elements, Functions, and Findings
Gregory G. Kolden, Ph.D. Gregory G. Kolden, Ph.D.
University of Wisconsin – MadisonUniversity of Wisconsin – Madison
Small to medium ES (Cohen, 1988) accounting for 7.5% variance in outcome
Broad & Inclusive Relational Elements
“Empathy”
Elliott, Bohart, Watson, & Greenberg (2011)
59 studies (k); 3599 participants (N)
Weighted aggregate ES = .31 (p < .001)
95% CI = .28 to .34
Medium ES (Cohen, 1988) accounting for 9% variance in outcome
Specific Relational Elements
“Goal Consensus”patient and therapist agreement on therapeutic goals
Tryon and Winograd (2011)
15 studies 2000-2009 (k); 1302 participants (N)
Weighted aggregate ES = .34 (p < .0001)
95% CI = .23 to .45
Medium ES (Cohen, 1988) accounting for 11.5% variance in outcome
Specific Relational Elements
“Collaboration”patient and therapist actively involved in cooperative relationship
Tryon and Winograd (2011)
19 studies 2000-2009 (k); 2260 participants (N)
Weighted aggregate ES = .33 (p < .0001)
95% CI = .25 to .42
Medium ES (Cohen, 1988) accounting for 11% variance in outcome
Specific Relational Elements
“Positive Regard”
Farber and Doolin (2011)
18 studies (k); 1067 participants (N)
Weighted aggregate ES = .27 (p < .000)
95% CI = .16 to .38
Small to medium ES (Cohen, 1988) accounting for 7% variance in outcome
Specific Relational Elements
“Congruence/Genuineness”
Kolden, Klein, Wang, & Austin (2011)
16 studies (k); 863 participants (N)
Weighted aggregate ES = .24 (p = .003)
95% CI = .12 to .36
Small to medium ES (Cohen, 1988) accounting for 6% variance in outcome
Specific Relational Elements
Summary
ES Variance MagnitudeAlliance .275 7.5% small to medium
Empathy .31 9% medium
Goal Consensus .34 11.5% medium
Collaboration .33 11% medium
Positive Regard .27 7% small to medium
Congruence .24 6% small to medium
Relational elements relevant for IPT
Can we identify relational elements and behaviors specific to IPT?
Can we identify general relational elements and behaviors important for IPT?
Can we identify relational elements and behaviors
proscribed for IPT?
Relational elements relevant for IPT
IPT specific
goal consensus
General
collaboration
empathy
positive regard
congruence/genuineness
Relational elements relevant for IPT
Proscribed
low levels of effective relational elements
excessive focus on transference configurations
ineffective therapist relational behaviors
Therapist Practices
• Explicitly embrace idea of actively cultivating relational behaviors with clients.
• Relational behaviors must be mindfully developed and practiced as complex therapy skills.
• Effective therapists seek awareness of their typical relational style and model healthy relational behaviors.
Therapist Practices
• The maintenance of effective relational behaviors requires therapist awareness of instances when the relationship falters.
• Effective therapists will adjust relational behaviors according to client characteristics, needs, preferences, and expectations (e.g., age, education, culture)
Therapist Practices
Be mindful of “ineffective” therapist relational behaviors!