Commenting On Process Highlighting Basi
Journal of Psychotherapy Integration
2013, Vol. 23, No. 2, 193–203
© 2013 American Psychological Association
1053-0479/13/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/a0032356
COMMENTARY
Commenting on Process: Highlighting a Basic Psychotherapeutic
Technique
Robert E. McGrath and Gillian J. Donovan
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Fairleigh Dickinson University
This article explores the concept of commenting on process as a therapeutic technique.
Commenting on process occurs when the therapist focuses attention on some aspect of the patient’s in-session behavior. Many schools of therapy encourage discussion of the patient’s behavior outside the therapy relationship, though they differ in the degree to which they emphasize such discussions. Discussion of behavior within therapy is particularly characteristic of dynamic theory, in which it has been conceptualized as one form of confrontation, and in interpersonal therapy, in which it is perceived as a core therapeutic technique. We propose that by distinguishing it from other forms of confrontation, and by highlighting the technique’s focus on observable behavior, an argument can be made that commenting on process represents a potentially useful tool in any form of therapy. It also merits empirical evaluation concerning the extent to which such comments occur in practice and whether such comments can contribute to therapy outcomes. Common characteristics of comments on process are described.
Finally, some guidelines are suggested for training students on how to improve their effectiveness at commenting on patient process.
Keywords: psychotherapy process, integrative psychotherapy, confrontation
When asked to describe their theoretical orientation, integrative or eclectic is consistently found to be the modal response among psychologists who provide
2013, Vol. 23, No. 2, 193–203
© 2013 American Psychological Association
1053-0479/13/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/a0032356
COMMENTARY
Commenting on Process: Highlighting a Basic Psychotherapeutic
Technique
Robert E. McGrath and Gillian J. Donovan
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Fairleigh Dickinson University
This article explores the concept of commenting on process as a therapeutic technique.
Commenting on process occurs when the therapist focuses attention on some aspect of the patient’s in-session behavior. Many schools of therapy encourage discussion of the patient’s behavior outside the therapy relationship, though they differ in the degree to which they emphasize such discussions. Discussion of behavior within therapy is particularly characteristic of dynamic theory, in which it has been conceptualized as one form of confrontation, and in interpersonal therapy, in which it is perceived as a core therapeutic technique. We propose that by distinguishing it from other forms of confrontation, and by highlighting the technique’s focus on observable behavior, an argument can be made that commenting on process represents a potentially useful tool in any form of therapy. It also merits empirical evaluation concerning the extent to which such comments occur in practice and whether such comments can contribute to therapy outcomes. Common characteristics of comments on process are described.
Finally, some guidelines are suggested for training students on how to improve their effectiveness at commenting on patient process.
Keywords: psychotherapy process, integrative psychotherapy, confrontation
When asked to describe their theoretical orientation, integrative or eclectic is consistently found to be the modal response among psychologists who provide
References: Abramowitz, J. S. (1997). Effectiveness of psychological and pharmacological treatments for obsessive-compulsive disorder: A quantitative review. Allen, J. G., Fonagy, P., & Bateman, A. (2008). Baer, R. A., Fischer, S., & Huss, D. B. (2005). Barber, J. P., & DeRubeis, R. J. (2001). Change in compensatory skills in cognitive therapy for de- Beitman, B., & Soth, A. M. (2006). Activation of self-observation: A core process among the psychotherapies Blagys, M. D., & Hilsenroth, M. J. (2000). Distinctive activities of short-term psychodynamicinterpersonal psychotherapy: A review of the comparative psychotherapy process literature. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 7, 167–188. Castonguay, L. G., & Goldfried, M. R. (1994). Psychotherapy integration: An idea whose time has come P. J., & Hayes, A. M. (1996). Predicting the effect of cognitive therapy for depression: A study of D. N., Rothbaum, B. O., & Manber, R. (2012). The relation between changes in patients’ interpersonal Oppen, P. (2008). Psychotherapy for depression in adults: A meta-analysis of comparative outcome R. F., & Lewinsohn, P. M. (2011). The origins and current status of behavioral activation treatments Frank, K. A. (2002). The “ins and outs” of enactment: A relational bridge for psychotherapy integration. Journal of Psychotherapy Integration, 12, 267–286 Gelso, C. J., & Carter, J. (1994). Components of the psychotherapy relationship: Their interaction and Greenberg, L. (2008). Emotion and cognition in psychotherapy: The transforming power of affect. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienne, 49, 49 –59