As written by Jerome and Julia Frank, “Scientific methods, however, deal poorly with the meanings of the therapeutic situation… Psychotherapy may be better understood by its similarities to rhetoric, including sources of influence, targets, and the methods of persuasion used.” (Frank, 73). Even though PDT seeks to create “unified protocols that integrate principles of empirically supported treatments [that] do not yet exist,” the treatments by themselves aren’t effectively evaluated by the scientific method (Leichsenring et. al 2014). This is because as a form of evocative therapy, the patient’s evocation is crucial to whether or not the treatment will be successful. Otherwise, there is no one method that can be applied to every single patient that comes in with a myriad of issues to deal with. Furthermore, Seligman believes “that the ‘effectiveness’ study of how patients fare under the actual conditions of treatment in the field, can yield useful and credible ‘empirical validation’ of psychotherapy and medication” (Seligman, 966). Without the patient’s input from psychotherapy treatment, there is no clear way of moving forward. PDT, then, seeks “By the modular format, both the course of treatment and individual differences between patients can be taken into account, for example, patient motivation or severity of pathology.” (Leichsenring et. al 2014). This modular …show more content…
Of course, changes have been made to PDT by including directive therapy methods, which are used to deal with the treatment of anxiety disorders and depression (Leichsenring et. al 2014). Overall though, PDT continues to fit the ideals, techniques, and evidence-based processes that evocative therapies have in the past. PDT, like other psychotherapies, is adapting to an ever-changing field and will continue its best to pursue evocative methods so long as it remains effective in treating