Are Some Psychotherapies Much More Effective Than Others?

Authors: Luborsky L.¹; Rosenthal R.²; Diguer L.³; Andrusyna T.P.⁴; Levitt J.T.⁵; Seligman D.A.⁶; Berman J.S.⁷; Krause E.D.⁸

Source: Journal of Applied Psychoanalytic Studies, Volume 5, Number 4, October 2003 , pp. 455-460(6)

Publisher: Springer

Buy & download fulltext article:

Price: $47.00 plus tax (Refund Policy)

Abstract:

In a previous paper we had reported on the examination of comparisons of 18 metaanalyses of active treatments with each other (Luborsky, Rosenthal, Diguer, et al., 2001). These metaanalyses gave a small and nonsignificant mean level of difference between types of treatments. The smallness of this correlation confirms Rosenzweig's (1936) expectation that because of the large overlap in effective ingredients of different psychotherapies, comparative studies of psychotherapies would show little difference. Such a comparison that includes psychoanalyses seems a long way off, but if outcomes of psychoanalyses are defined similarly to those in the other psychotherapies, the expected differences in outcomes may also be small.

Keywords: comparisons of active psychotherapies; psychotherapy outcomes; correction for researcher's treatment allegiances; empirically validated treatments; the Dodo bird verdict

Language: English

Document Type: Research article

Affiliations: 1: Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA; luborsky@landru.cpr.upenn.edu 2: Department of Psychology, University of California, Riverside, CA 3: Department of Psychology, Laval University, Quebec, Canada 4: Department of Psychology, North Western University, Evanton, IL 5: School of Medicine, New York University, New York, NY 6: Access Measurement Systems, Ashland, MA 7: Department of Psychology, University of Memphis, Memphis, TN 8: Department of Psychology, Duke University, Durham, NC