Understanding the therapeutic relationship

Current Opinion in Psychiatry

Volumn 10, Issue 3, 1997, Pages 233-238

  Alexander, Leslie B ^a   Coffey, Darla S ^a  

^a BRYN MAWR COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; DOCTOR PATIENT RELATION; EMOTIONAL ATTACHMENT; HUMAN; PSYCHIATRY; PSYCHOTHERAPY; SHORT SURVEY; TRANSFERENCE;

EID: 0030993622     PISSN: 09517367     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00001504-199705000-00011     Document Type: Short Survey

References (91)

1. Horvath AO. Symonds BD: Relation between working alliance and outcome in psychotherapy: a meta-analysis. J Consult Clin Psychol 1991, 38:139-149.
2. Horvath AO, Greenberg LS (Editors): The working alliance: theory, research and practice. New York: John Wiley and Sons; 1994.
3. Horvath AO, Luborsky L: The role of the therapeutic alliance in psychotherapy. J Consult Clin Psychol 1993,61:561-573.
4. Henry WP, Strupp HH, SchachtTE, Gaston L:Psychodynamic approaches. In Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change, edn 4. Edited by Bergin AE, Garfield SL. New York: John Wiley and Sons; 1994:467-508.
5. Frank AF: The therapeutic alliance of borderline patients. In Borderline personality disorders. Edited by Clarkin JF, Marziali E, Monroe-Blum H. New York: Guilford Press; 1991:220-247.
6. Gaston L: The concept of the alliance and its role in psychotherapy: theoretical and empirical considerations. Psychotherapy 1990,27:143-153.
7. Burlingame GM, Barlow SH: Outcome and process differences between professional and nonprofessional therapists in time-limited group psychotherapy, Int J Group Psychother 1996,46:455-477.
8. Eltz MJ, Shirk SR, Sarlin N:Alliance formation and treatment outcome among maltreated adolescents. Child Abuse Negl 1995,19:419-431.
9. Friedlander ML, Wildman J, Heatherington L, Skowron EA: What we do and don't know about the process of family therapy. J Fam Psychol 1994,8:390-416.
10. Shirk SR, Saiz CC: Clinical, empirical, and developmental perspectives on the therapeutic relationship in child psychotherapy. Dev Psychopathol 1992, 4:713-728.
11. Pinsof WM: Integrative problem centered therapy: a synthesis of family, individual, and biological therapies. New York: John Wiley and Sons: 1995.
12. Neale MS, Rosenheck RA Therapeutic alliance and outcome in VA intensive case management program. Psychiatr Serv 1995,46:719-721.
13. Solomon S, Draine J, Delaney MA: The working alliance and consumer case management J Ment Health Admin 1995,22:126-134.
14. Draine J, Solomon P: Case manager alliance with clients in an older cohort Commun Ment Health J 1996,32:125-133.
15. Dore MM, Alexander LB: Preserving families at risk of child abuse and neglect: the role of the helping alliance. Child Abuse Negl 1996. 20:349-361. The authors point out compatibilities and differences between performing alliance research in community-based compared with research-based settings and propose a research agenda for extending alliance research to family preservation services, which are widespread in the USA.
16. Krupnick JL, Sotsky SM, Simmens S, Moyer J, Elkin I, Watkins J. Pilkonis PA: The role of the therapeutic alliance in psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy outcome: treatment in the National Institute of Mental Health Treatment of Depression Collaborative research program. J Consult Clin Psychol 1996,64:532-539. An important study, nested in a large clinical trial, confirming the predictive validity of the alliance, across cognitive-behavioral, interpersonal, and for the first time, pharmacological therapy. An excellent discussion is given of the implications of this clinical trial for future alliance research. It should be noted, however, that the observer-rated Vanderbilt Psychotherapy Process Scale, used to assess the alliance, is not one of the commonly used alliance measures.
17. Suh CS, Strupp HH, O'Malley SS: The Vanderbilt Process Measures: the Psychotherapy Process Scale (VPPS) and the Negative Indicators Scale (VNIS). In Handbook of psychotherapy and behaviour change. 4th edn. Edited by Bergin AE, Garfield SL: New York: John Wiley and Sons: 1994:285-324.
18. Castonguay LC, Goldfried MR, Wiser S, Raue PJ, Hayes AD: Predicting the effect of cognitive therapy for depression: a study of unique and common effects. J Consult Clin Psychol 1996,64:497-504. A well executed study extending the exploration of unique and common effects within a single treatment for a single disorder, with the alliance being one of two common factors studied predicting client improvement.
19. Luborksy L: Theories of cure in psychoanalytic psychotherapies and the evidence for them. Psychoanaly Inq 1996,16:257-264.
20. Oei TPS, Shuttlewood GJ: Specific and nonspecific factors in psychotherapy: a case of cognitive therapy for depression. Clin Psychol Rev 1996,16:83-103. An excellent critique of ways to conceptualize specific and nonspecific factors in treatment, with particular focus on cognitive therapy for depression. The authors develop a good argument for examining specific and nonspecific factors within a given treatment modality for a particular problem.
21. Gaston L, Goldfried MR, Greenberg LS, Horvath AO, Raue PJ, Watson J:The therapeutic alliance in psychodynamic, cognitive-behavioral, and experiential therapies. J Psychother Integration 1995,5:1-26.
22. Safran JD. Muran JC: Towards a working alliance between research and practice. In Psychotherapy research and practice: bridging the gap. Edited by Talley PF, Strupp H, Butler SF: New York: Basic Books; 1994:202-226.
23. Safran JD, Muran JC: Resolving therapeutic alliance ruptures: diversity and integration. Session Psychother Pract 1995,1:81-92.
24. Safran JD, Muran JC: The resolution of rupture in the therapeutic alliance. J Consult Clin Psychol 1996,64:447-458. A clear, thorough review of important developments in programmtic research on alliance ruptures and repairs at the Beth Israel Hospital
25. Safran JD, Muran JC: The therapeutic alliance [Editorial]. In Session Psychother Pract 1995,1:1-92.
26. Sexton HC, Hembre K, Kvarme G: The interaction of the alliance and therapy microprocess: a sequential analysis. J Consult Clin Psychol 1996,64:471-480. A complex but clearly explained and executed exploratory study of the interaction of phasic therapy microprocesses and the alliance over time, suggesting that alliance formation can occur rapidly, even by the end of the first session.
27. Horvath AO: Research on the alliance. In The working alliance: theory, research and practice. Edited by Horvath A, Greenberg LS. New York: John Wiley and Sons; 1994:259-286.
28. Luborsky L, Barber JP, Siqueland L Johnson S, Najavits LM, Frank A, Daley D: The revised Helping Alliance Questionnaire (Haq): psychometric properties. J Psychother Practice Res 1996,5:260-271.
29. Luborsky L: Helping alliances in psychotherapy: the groundwork for a study of their relationship to outcome. In Successful psychotherapy. Edited by Claghorn JL. New York: Brunner/Maezel; 1976:92-116.
30. Alexander LB, Luborsky L: Research on the helping alliance. In The psychotherapeutic process. Edited by Greenberg LS, Pinsof W: New York: Guilford Press; 1986:325-366.
31. Luborsky L, McLellan AT, Woody GE, O'Brien CP, Auerbach A: Therapist success and its determinants. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1995,42:602-611.
32. Marziali E: Three viewpoints on the Therapeutic Alliance Scales: similarities, differences and associations with psychotherapy outcome. J Nerv Mental Dis 1984, 172:417-423.
33. Gaston L:Reliability and criterion-related validity of the California Psychotherapy Alliance Scales: patient version. Psychol Assess 1991,3:68-74.
34. Marmar CR, Weiss DS, Gaston L:Toward the validation of the California Therapeutic Rating System. Psychol Assess 1989,1:46-52.
35. Gaston L, Marmar CR:The California Psychotherapy Alliance Scales. In The working alliance: theory, research, and practice. Edited by Horvath AO, Greenberg LS: New York: Guilford Press; 1994:85-108.
36. Horvath AO, Greenberg L:Development and validation of the Working Alliance Inventory. J Counsel Psychol 1989,36:223-232.
37. Horvath AO, Marx RW: The development and decay of the working alliance during time-limited counselling. Can J Counsel 1991,24:240-259.
38. Horvath AO: Empirical validation of Bordin's pantheoretical model of the alliance: the Working Alliance Inventory perspective. In The working alliance: theory, research, and practice. Edited by Horvath AO, Greenberg LS: New York: Guilford Press; 1994:109-128.
39. Luborsky L, Barber JR, Siqueland L, Johnson S, Najavits LM, Frank A, Daley D: The revised Helping Alliance Questionnaire (HAQ): psychometric properties. J Psychother Pract Res 1996, 5:260-271.
40. Hatcher RL, Barends AW: 'Patients' view of the alliance in psychotherapy: exploratory factor analysis of three alliance measures. J Consult Clin Psychol 1996, 64:1326-1336. A provocative and thoughtful study of the responses of 231 patients to three widely used alliance measures, concluding that none of the three captured the essential components of the alliance very well, especially its core, confident collaboration between client and therapist, with patients who acknowledge some hostility doing better in therapy. Overall, the authors found extreme divergence between the exploratory analyses and the measures' conceptual models. Study limitations are acknowledged, including cross-sectional data, using responders with a highly divergent range of treatment sessions, absence of a manualized therapy, and the use of relatively inexperienced therapists.
41. Saunders SM, Howard Kl, Orlinsky DE: The therapeutic bond scales: psychometric characteristics and relationship to treatment effectiveness. Psychol Assess 1989, 1:323-330.
42. Kolden GG: Change in early sessions of dynamic therapy: universal processes and the generic model of psychotherapy. J Consult Clin Psychol 1996, 64:489-496. An interesting and well executed naturalistic study using a hierarchical multiple regression data-analytic strategy to replicate and extend earlier work that addressed propositions of the generic model about universal change processes in early sessions of dynamic psychotherapy.
43. Orlinsky DE, Howard KI: A generic model of psychotherapy. J Integrative Eclectic Psychother 1987, 6:6-27.
44. Gurtman MB: Interpersonal problems and the psychotherapy context: the construct validity of the Inventory of Interpersonal Problems. J Consult Clin Psychol 1996, 8:241-255. A thorough, excellent review of empirical research on the Inventory of Interpersonal Problems which assesses an important client predisposition that has been associated with alliance formation in some investigations, although not in this one. This study provides direct support for the agreement of patient-rated Inventory of Interpersonal Problems reports and therapists' judgments of interpersonal functioning. A short form (26 items) of the Inventory of Interpersonal Problems was used successfully in this investigation.
45. Muran JC, Segal ZV, Samstag LW, Crawford CE: Patient pretreatment, interpersonal problems and therapeutic alliance in short-term cognitive therapy. J Consult Clin Psychol 1994, 62:185-190.
46. Duan C, Hill CE: The current state of empathy research. J Counsel Psychol 1996, 43:261-274. A comprehensive and sophisticated review covering conceptual confusion, empirical difficulties, and neglected areas of research. The authors give useful suggestions for improving and expanding research in this area, which has been largely eclipsed by alliance research.
47. Blatt S, Quinlan DM, Zuroff DC, Pilkonis PA: Interpersonal factors in brief treatment of depression: further analyses of the National Instutute of Mental Health Treatment of Depression Collaborative research program. J Consult Clin Psychol 1996, 64:162-171. The authors review positive findings, linking the patient version of the Barrett-Lennard Relationship Inventory (a scale assessing therapist-offered conditions in therapy, including empathic understanding but not collaboration between patient and therapist) to therapeutic change in the Treatment Of Depression Collaborative Research Program.
48. Barrett-Lennard GT: The Relationship inventory now: issues and advances in theory, method and use. In The Psychoanalytic process: a resource handbook. Edited by Greenberg LS, Pinsof WM, New York: Guilford; 1986: 439-476.
49. Gabbard GO: The analyst's contribution to the erotic transference. Contemp Psychoanal 1996, 32:249-273. Tha author discusses the erotic transference within an interpersonal paradigm, focusing on the therapist's role in its development.
50. Margison F: Boundary violations and psychotherapy. Curr Opin Psychiatry 1996, 9:204-208. An excellent and concise review of recent advances in understanding and preventing boundary violations. The author includes a discussion of risky situations for therapists in light of recent literature on the erotic transference.
51. Book HE: The 'erotic transference': some technical and counter-transferential difficulties. Am J Psychotherapy 1995, 49:504-513. This article highlights dynamics that may interfere with the identification and therapeutic working-through of an erotic transference.
52. Ehrenberg DB: On the analyst's emotional availability and vulnerability. Contemp Psychoanal 1996, 32:275-286.
53. Coen SJ: Love between therapist and patient: a review. Am J Psychotherapy 1996, 50:14-27
54. Levenson EA: Aspects of self-revelation and self-disclosure. Contemp Psychoanal 1996, 32:237-248.
55. May M: Resistance: friend or foe? Am J Psychotherapy 1996, 50:32-44.
56. Buckley P: An object relations perspective on the nature of resistance and therapeutic change. Am J Psychotherapy 1996, 50:45-53.
57. Rowe CE: The concept of resistance in self psychology. Am J Psychotherapy 1996, 50:66-74.
58. Strean HS: Resistance viewed from different perspectives. Am J Psychotherapy 1996, 50:29-31.
59. Hill CD, Nutt-Williams E, Heaton KJ, Thompson BJ, Rhodes RH: Therapist retrospective recall of impasses in long-term psychotherapy: a qualitative analysis. J Counsel Psychol 1996, 43:207-217. This article presents findings from a small qualitative study of impasses in long-term psychotherapy, based on therapists' interviews. The results are clinically very interesting. Generally, therapists interpret impasses as reflective of something gone awry in the therapeutic relationship.
60. Multon KD, Patton MJ, Kivlighan DM: Development of the Missouri Identifying Transference Scale. J Counsel Psychol 1996, 43:243-252. This description of the development and use of this new transference scale is very useful. There is also a productive dialogue with reviewers immediately after this article that identifies some of the conceptual and empirical issues that need to be addressed in future research.
61. Carter JA: Measuring transference: can we identify what we have not defined? J Counsel Psychol 1996, 43:257-258.
62. Mallinckrodt B: Capturing the subjective and other challenges in measuring transference: comment on Multon, Patton and Kivlighan. J Counsel Psychol 1996, 43:253-256.
63. Luborsky L: Measuring a pervasive psychic structure in psychotherapy: the core conflictual relationship theme. In Communicative structures and psychic structures. Edited by Freedman N, Grand S. New York: Plenum Press; 1977:367-395.
64. Popp CA, Diguer L, Luborsky L, Faude J, Johnson S, Morris M, Schaffer N, Schaffler p, Schmidt K: Repetitive relationship themes in waking narratives and dreams. J Consult Clin Psychol 1996, 64:1073-1078.
65. Grenyer BFS, Luborsky L: Dynamic change in psychotherapy: mastery of interpersonal conflicts. J Consult Clin Psychol 1996, 64:411-416. This investigation of maladaptive interpersonal patterns and psychotherapy outcomes gives a solid overview of the Core Conflictual Relationship Theme method.
66. Benjamin LS: The Intrex user's manual, parts I and II. Salt Lake City: University of Utah; 1983.
67. Benjamin LS: Use of Structural Analysis of Social Behavior (SASB) to guide intervention in psychotherapy. In Handbook of interpersonal psychotherapy. Edited by Anchin JC, Kiesler DJ, New York: Pergamon Press; 1982:190-212.
68. Benjamin LS: The INTREX user's manual, part I and II. Madison, WI: INTREX Interpersonal Institute; 1983.
69. Dunkle JH, Friedlander ML: Contribution of therapist experience and personal characteristics to the working alliance. J Counsel Psychol 1996, 43:456-460. This study provides a creative use of the Structural Analysis of Social Behavior method, finding that therapist self-directed hostility negatively affected the alliance. Comfort with attachment and perceived social supports, alternatively, positively affected the alliance as perceived by the clients.
70. Horowitz MJ (Ed): Person schemas and maladaptive interpersonal patterns, Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1991.
71. Schact T, Binder J, Strupp H: The dynamic focus. In Psychotherapy in a new key: a guide to time-limited dynamic psychotherapy. Edited by Strupp H, Binder J, New York: Basic Books; 1984:65-109.
72. Teller V, Dahl H: The microstructure of free association. J Am Psychoanal Ass 1986, 34:763-798.
73. Weiss J, Sampson H, Mount Zion Psychotherapy Research Group: The psychoanalytic process: theory, clinical observations and empirical research. New York: Guilford Press; 1986.
74. Luborsky L, Barber JP: Perspectives on seven transference-related measures applied to the interview with Ms. Smithfield. Psychother Res 1994, 4:152-154.
75. Mallinckrodt B, Coble HM, Gantt DL: Toward differentiating client attachment from working alliance and transference: reply to Robbins (1995). J Counsel Psychol 1995, 3:320-322.
76. Collins NL, Read SJ: Adult attachment working models, and relationship quality in dating couples. J Pers Soc Psychol 1990, 58:644-663.
77. Mallinckrodt B, Coble HM, Gantt DL: Working alliance, attachment memories, and social competencies of women in brief therapy. J Counsel Psychol 1995, 42:79-84.
78. Satterfield SW, Lyddon WJ: Client attachment and perceptions of the working alliance with counselor trainees. J Counsel Psychol 1995, 42:187-189.
79. Mallinckrodt B, Coble HM, Gantt DL: Attachment patterns in the psychotherapy relationship: development of the client attachment to therapist scale. J Counsel Psychol 1995, 42:307-317.
80. Robbins SB: Attachment perspectives on the counseling relationship: comment on Mallinckrodt, Gantt, and Coble (1995). J Counsel Psychol 1995, 42:318-319.
81. Fonagy P, Leigh T, Steele M, Steele H, Kennedy R, Mattoon G, Target M, Gerber A: The relations of attachment status, psychiatric classification, and response to psychotherapy. J Consult Clin Psychol 1996, 64:22-31.
82. Toth S, Cicchetti D: Patterns of relatedness, depressive symptomatology, and perceived competence in maltreated children. J Consult Clin Psychol 1996, 64:8-21,
83. Lyons-Ruth K: Attachment relationships among children with aggressive behavior problems: the role of disorganized early attachment patterns. J Consult Clin Psychol 1996, 64:64-73.
84. Jones EE: Introduction to the special section on attachment and psychopathology: Part 1. J Consult Clin Psychol 1996, 64:5-7.
85. Miranda J: Introduction to the special section on recruiting minorities in psychotherapy research. J Consult Clin Psychol 1996, 64:848-850. Beginning with Miranda's introduction, the whole section that follows provides excellent ways to recruit and retain a range of minority populations in research, an important first step in exploring the ways in which sociocultural factors affect the therapeutic relationship.
86. Hohmann AA, Parron DL: How the new NIH guidelines on inclusion of women and minorities apply: efficacy, effectiveness, and validity. J Consult Clin Psychol 1996, 64:851-855. A very informative discussion of the rationale behind, specific content of, and relationship between the National Institutes of Health Guidelines and clinical trials and mental health services research.
87. Alvidrez A, Azocar F, Miranda J: Demystifying the concept of ethnicity for psychotherapy researchers. J Consult Clin Psychol 1996, 64:903-908. This group provides an excellent discussion of ways to conceptualize, measure, and interpret ethnic factors in psychotherapy research. They include an excellent description of possible pathways and the ways these pathways may be linked to psychotherapy outcomes.
88. Beutler LE, Brown MT, Crothers L, Booker K, Seabrook MK: The dilemma of factitious demographic distinctions in psychological research. J Consult Clin Psychol 1996, 64:892-902. Another excellent article in this series describes ways in which race and ethnicity have been used in research and some of the difficulties in defining and making sense of sociodemographic data.
89. Russell GL, Fujino DC, Sue S, Cheung M-K, Snowden LR: The effects of therapist-client match in the assessment of mental health functioning. J Cross-Cultural Psychol 1996, 27:598-615. Based on over 10 000 unduplicated clients of African, Asian, Mexican, and white clients and their therapists in outpatient services in Los Angeles County, USA, mental health facilities between 1983 and 1988, findings revealed that ethnically matched therapists judged their clients to have higher mental health functioning, using the Global Assessment Scale than did mismatched therapists. This effect persisted for African-American and Asian clients, after age, gender, marital status, and referral source were controlled. Implications and limitations of these findings were discussed.
90. Iwamasa GY, Smith SK: Ethnic diversity in behavioral psychology. Behav Modification 1996, 20:45-59. This solid review of all articles in three major behavioral treatment journals revealed very low coverage of articles on ethnic minority groups, suggested why this might be so and made suggestions for ameliorating the problem.
91. Trevino JG: Worldview and change in cross-cultural counselling. Counseling Psychol 1996, 24:198-215. An interesting discussion of how the notion of worldview might he used to understand change within cross-cultural counseling.