The myth of evidence-based psychotherapy

Psychologist

Volumn 17, Issue 7, 2004, Pages 392-395

  Marzillier, John ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 3042632987     PISSN: 09528229     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (9)

1. Bentall, R. (2003). Madness explained: Psychosis and human nature. London:Allen Lane.
2. Davey, G. (2003). Doing clinical psychology research. The Psychologist, 16, 412-416.
3. Fonagy, P. & Roth, A. (1996). What works for whom? A critical review of psychotherapy research. New York: Guilford Press.
4. Frank, J. (1961). Persuasion and healing. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
5. Luborsky, L., Singer, B. & Luborsky, L. (1975). Comparative studies of psychotherapies: Is it true that 'Everyone has won and all must have prizes?' Archives of General Psychiatry, 32, 995-1008.
6. Mitchell, K.M., Bozarth, J.D. & Krauft, C.C. (1977). A reappraisal of the therapeutic effectiveness of accurate empathy, non-possessive warmth and genuineness. In A.S. Gurman & A.M. Razin (Eds.) Effective psychothempy: A handbook of research. New York: Pergamon Press.
7. Morrow-Bradley, C. & Elliott, R. (1986). Utilization of psychotherapy research by practicing psychologists. American Psychologist, 41, 188-197.
8. Shapiro, D. & Firth, J. (1987). Prescriptive v. exploratory psychotherapy: Outcomes of the Sheffield Psychotherapy Project. British journal of Psychiatry, 151, 790-799.
9. Wessely, S. & Deahl, M. (2003). Psychological debriefing is a waste of time [Debate]. British Journal of Psychiatry, 183, 12-14.