Life Is About Change: A Professional Memoir.

Receiving my doctorate in 1961 just as John F. Kennedy was inaugurated president of the United States, I was inspired by his sentiment that any person can make a difference, and every person should try. In this memoir I review my professional journey of trying to make a difference in researching, teaching, supervising, and practicing clinical psychology and psychotherapy. I began my career by working on an evidence base for projective techniques. Upon joining the Stony Brook faculty, I shifted my efforts to research on and practice of behavior therapy, and then to the incorporation of cognition in developing cognitive behavioral therapy. Further work on integration consisted of closing the gap between research and practice, lowering the barriers that existed across schools of therapy, and incorporating lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender issues into mainstream psychology. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, Volume 20 is May 2024. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

Consensus on the perceived presence of transtheoretical principles of change in routine psychotherapy practice: A survey of clinicians and researchers.

Goldfried (1982) hypothesized that there are five transtheoretical principles of change that guide routine psychotherapy practice. This survey investigated if there is consensus on the perceived presence of these principles in the approaches of a professionally diverse pool of psychotherapy clinicians and researchers. One thousand nine hundred ninety-eight participants, aged 21-85 years (M = 50.4 years, SD = 15.59) and representing a wide variety of theoretical orientations, completed an online survey. For consensus to be indicated, 95% confidence intervals of mean agreement scores had to be above 4.0 (out of 5). Mean agreement levels in response to "the extent to which you agree that the following principles are present in your own approach to psychotherapy" indicated consensus for all five principles: (a) fostering hope, positive expectations, and motivation (M = 4.58; 95% CI [4.53, 4.62]); (b) facilitating the therapeutic alliance (M = 4.76; 95% CI [4.73, 4.80]); (c) increasing awareness and insight (M = 4.66; 95% CI [4.63, 4.70]); (d) encouraging corrective experiences (M = 4.44; 95% CI [4.39, 4.48]); (e) emphasizing ongoing reality testing (M = 4.15; 95% CI [4.09, 4.20]). These findings were unaffected by age, gender, working patterns, practice (clinician or researcher), and years of experience; however, consensus on the final two principles was not indicated for both psychodynamic and experiential psychotherapists. The demonstrated consensus surrounding the transtheoretical principles of change corresponds with their consistently yielded outcome associations in previous research. The combination of these evidence sources points to the importance of the principles in routine psychotherapy practice, which warrants further investigation. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Revived call for consensus in the future of psychotherapy.

The emblem of success in psychotherapy research and practice has long been innovation. Although such ingenuity is commendable, it has nonetheless perpetuated fragmentation across the field. At least four decades ago, it was suggested that achieving consensus on what constitutes psychotherapy's theoretical, empirical, and practical 'core' might allow the discipline to evolve beyond its siloed state, as is reflective of mature science. Yet, division remains the rule versus exception, owing in large part to power struggles among disparate schools of therapy and quarrels over whether theory-specific or theory-common factors most account for therapeutic change. We outline here a vision for psychotherapy's future that is defined by consensus rather than disintegration. Namely, we reiterate the need for the field to invest in clinical strategies that transcend ostensibly incompatible theoretical models. We also argue that psychotherapy research should build on the growing evidence for such clinical strategies in an effort to establish core, evidence-based principles of therapeutic change. We then discuss how establishing consensus will require reconciliation among the mounting evidence for flexible, principle-informed practice with the current realities of training, dissemination, and implementation paradigms. Finally, we articulate ways in which practicing clinicians will serve a vital role in carrying out, and amending as needed, actionable efforts toward psychotherapy consensus.

The gap between science and practice: A conversation.

The authors, friends, colleagues, and collaborators for almost 60 years engage in an informal discussion concerning the gap between science and practice. They identify some sources of the problem, some manifestations of it, and point the way to some possible solutions. The articles in this special section, because of their use of data collected in a naturalistic setting and the prominent role of clinicians, are viewed as one of many promising directions for the reconciliation of the activity of researchers and the needs of clinicians. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Obtaining consensus in psychotherapy: What holds us back?

Although the field of psychotherapy has been in existence for well over a century, it nonetheless continues to be preparadigmatic, lacking a consensus or scientific core. Instead, it is characterized by a large and increasing number of different schools of thought. In addition to the varying ways in which psychotherapy has been conceptualized, there also exists a long-standing gap between psychotherapy research and how it is conducted in actual clinical practice. Finally, there also exists a tendency to place great emphasis on what is new, often rediscovering or reinventing past contributions. This article describes each of these impediments to obtaining consensus and offers some suggestions for what might be done to address them. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Clinical Consensus Strategies to Repair Ruptures in the Therapeutic Alliance.

OBJECTIVE: The alliance been recognized as an essential common factor and robust predictor of outcome. The present study sought to further our knowledge of the alliance and to promote the integration of research and practice by assessing consensus among peer-nominated expert therapists of varying theoretical orientations on the effectiveness of clinical strategies to repair alliance ruptures. METHOD: This study drew on the behavioral-analytic model (Goldfried & D'Zurilla, 1969) and the methodology of the Expert Consensus Guideline Series (Frances, Docherty, & Kahn 1997). In Phase I, 69 therapists submitted clinical situations describing alliance ruptures. In Phase II, 177 therapists generated responses to the situations, and clinical strategies underlying the responses were identified. In Phase III, 134 peer-nominated experts (a mean of 22.3 therapists per situation) rated the effectiveness of these clinical strategies. RESULTS: The experts reached consensus on the use of strategies that validated the client's experience and explored the rupture during the rupture session. Change-oriented interventions (e.g., changing interpersonal interactions; highlighting patterns of behavior, thought, or emotions) were generally rated as less effective to use during the rupture, but effective for use in future sessions. CONCLUSIONS: The findings are consistent with the growing literature on the value of using certain alliance-focused interventions during a rupture. The findings point to the importance of therapists' awareness of the state of the alliance so that they can identify when ruptures are occurring.

Clinical Feedback About Empirically Supported Treatments for Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder.

Previous evidence for the treatment of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) has been derived principally from randomized controlled trials. As such, evidence about the treatment of OCD has unilaterally flowed from researchers to clinicians. Despite often having decades of experience treating OCD, clinicians' feedback on their clinical observations in using these treatments has not been solicited. The current study contacted clinicians for their clinical observations on empirically supported treatments for OCD to identify commonly used cognitive-behavioral techniques and their limitations in their practices. One hundred eighty-one psychotherapists completed an online survey. The average participant practiced psychotherapy for 15 years, worked in private practice, held a doctorate, and treated an average of 25 clients with OCD in their lifetime. In regard to the most common techniques, behavioral strategies involving exposure to a feared outcome and prevention of a compulsive ritual were the most frequent group of interventions, followed by techniques that attempted to identify and challenge irrational thoughts. However, the majority of participants also reported incorporating mindfulness or acceptance-based methods. Based on therapists' reports, the most common barriers to the efficacy of cognitive-behavioral interventions included limited premorbid functioning, chaotic lifestyles, controlling and critical families, OCD symptom severity, OCD symptom chronicity, and comorbidities. This study provides insight into common practices and limitations in clinical practice to inform future clinically relevant treatment research.

A Professional Journey Through Life.

In response to the request to write about those changes that have occurred in my professional outlook and practice that have come with age, I have recounted some of the experiences I have had that seem to have contributed to these changes. There are a couple of important themes that have run through my professional experiences as a therapist, supervisor, teacher, and researcher. One of the themes has to do with my psychotherapy orientation. The other involves the tension that I have experienced between research and practice. I begin by discussing each of these, and then go on to highlight some of the more general lessons learned over the years, including coming to be more myself as a therapist, developing a broader perspective on life, being more clinically integrative, and learning to be accepting of what therapy can and cannot do.

Research on psychotherapy integration: building on the past, looking to the future.

Integration has become an important and influential movement within psychotherapy practice, reflected by the fact that many treatment providers now identify as integrative. However, integration has not had as great an influence on psychotherapy research. The goal of this paper is to highlight the growing body of research on psychotherapy integration, and to identify future directions for research that may strengthen the integration movement as well as the field of psychotherapy as a whole. We first summarize the past 25 years of research on integration, with a focus on four approaches to integration: theoretical integration, technical eclectic, common factors, and assimilative integration. Next, we identify directions of research within these four areas that could strengthen and support integrative practice. We then propose ways in which the perspective of integrationists could contribute to psychotherapy research in the critical areas of harmful effects, therapist effects, practice-oriented research, and training. We end this paper by suggesting that a greater collaboration between integrationists and psychotherapy researchers will help to create a unified landscape of knowledge and action that will benefit all participants and advance the field.

Implications of RDoC for the research and practice of psychotherapy.

The field of psychotherapy is at an important juncture. Recent changes in the field include (a) the skeptical reception of the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual and (b) NIMH's prioritization of an alternative classification system to guide translational and intervention research. Moreover, (c) the field continues to be held accountable to governmental agencies and third-party payers to demonstrate its empirical basis. Thus, psychological research as it relates to the practice of psychotherapy is at a crossroads. In this article, we provide a brief overview of several generations of psychotherapy outcome research, including the consequences that followed in the 1980s as psychotherapy research moved toward randomized controlled trials for clinical disorders. We delineate the inherent strengths and limitations of this movement and address how the NIMH has recently responded with the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC). We then address philosophical and practical implications of the emphasis on a neuroscientific conceptualization of psychological problems. Finally, we discuss opportunities for a next generation of convergent science that incorporates, rather than replaces, psychosocial variables across stages of translational research and treatment development.

On the dissemination of clinical experiences in using empirically supported treatments.

This article addresses the long-standing gap that has existed between psychotherapy research and practice and the efforts that have been made to bridge it. It also introduces one such effort, which has consisted of 3 clinical surveys on the experiences of practitioners in using empirically supported treatments for panic disorder, social anxiety, and OCD. In contrast to attempts to close the gap by disseminating research findings to the clinician, the clinical surveys are intended to allow for practitioners to disseminate their clinical experiences to the researcher-and also to other clinicians. What we view as a "two-way bridge" initiative is a collaboration between the Society of Clinical Psychology, Division 12 of the APA, and the Psychotherapy Division of the APA-Division 29. The mechanism that has been established provides a way for clinicians to be a part of the research process, which we hope will provide evidence that can help to enhance our clinical effectiveness.

Clinical experiences in conducting empirically supported treatments for generalized anxiety disorder.

Knowledge of the efficacy of cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) for generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) predominantly derives from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). However, there may be unique or complex issues encountered in practice, but not necessarily in the context of a controlled clinical trial. Therefore, launching a systematic dialogue between researcher and practicing clinician can be instrumental in augmenting evidence-based therapies through identification of variables that promote and interfere with clinical effectiveness. Through an initiative sponsored by the American Psychological Association's Divisions 12 (Society for Clinical Psychology) and 29 (Psychotherapy), this study aimed to examine clinical experiences conducting CBT for GAD. The participants were 260 psychotherapists who completed an online survey on assessment and therapeutic intervention utilization and their experience of factors that limit successful GAD treatment and symptom reduction. The majority of respondents reported 20 years or less experience using ESTs for GAD, typically treating clients in outpatient clinics, treatment centers, and private practice. Some of the most commonly used interventions address clients' maladaptive cognitions and elevated anxiety and muscle tension typical of GAD. Approximately one half of respondents reported incorporating integrative techniques into treatment. Factors perceived as limiting effective GAD treatment included severity and chronicity of GAD, presence of comorbid conditions, stressful home and work environments, client motivation and resistance to treatment, and issues encountered when executing therapy techniques. This study provides researchers with clinically derived directions for future empirical investigation into enhancing efficacy of GAD treatment.

Clinical experiences in conducting cognitive-behavioral therapy for social phobia.

Several authors have identified a disconnect between psychotherapy research, including research on cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), and real-world psychotherapy practice. This disconnect has several negative consequences, potentially including less-than-optimal practice standards as well as a lack of input from practicing psychotherapists on how research can be improved and made more relevant in their day-to-day clinical work. As part of an ongoing effort to engage practicing psychotherapists in a feedback loop with psychotherapy researchers, this study reports the results of a survey of CBT therapists who have used CBT in the treatment of social phobia (SP). The survey was designed primarily to document how often certain potential problems, identified by expert researchers and CBT manuals, actually act as barriers to successful treatment when CBT is employed in nonresearch environments. The participants were 276 psychotherapists responding to email, online, and print advertisements completing the online survey. Participants varied considerably in psychotherapy experience, work environment, experience in using CBT for SP, and in some ways varied in their usual CBT techniques when treating SP. Among the most prominent barriers identified by many of the participants were patient motivation, comorbidity, logistical problems (especially with exposures), patient resistance, and severity and chronicity of SP symptoms. These findings may be useful for psychotherapy researchers as areas for potential study. The results may also suggest topics requiring clinical guidelines, innovations within CBT, and dissemination of successful techniques to address the barriers identified here.

Clinical experiences in using cognitive-behavior therapy to treat panic disorder.

Although there is a growing body of research to support the use of psychological treatments for specific disorders, there has been no way for practitioners to provide feedback to researchers on the barriers they encounter in implementing these treatments in their day-to-day clinical work. In order to provide practitioners a means to give researchers information about their clinical experience, the Society of Clinical Psychology and the Division of Psychotherapy of the American Psychological Association collaborated on an initiative to build a two-way bridge between practice and research. A questionnaire was developed on the therapist, patient, and contextual variables that undermine the effective use of CBT in reducing the symptoms of panic disorder, a clinical problem that occurs frequently in clinical practice and has an extensive research base. An Internet-based survey was advertised internationally in listservs and professional newsletters, asking clinicians to indicate all aspects of CBT that they used in treating panic disorder, and to respond to a series of questions with variables that presumably limited successful symptom reduction in clinical work using CBT to treat panic disorder. The final database included responses from 338 participants who varied in experience in applying CBT to the treatment of panic disorders. Participants identified a wide range of patient factors that were barriers to symptom reduction, including symptoms related to panic, motivation, social system, and the psychotherapy relationship, in addition to specific problems with implementing CBT for the treatment of panic disorder.

Evidence-based treatment and cognitive-affective-relational-behavior-therapy.

In conceptualizing CBT as an approach to treatment that is closely linked to basic empirical principles of human behavior, it is possible to incorporate evidence-based contributions from different theoretical orientations. This is illustrated by how CBT can be open to a variety of interventions that are not typically associated with CBT, but which nonetheless have empirical support. This article describes the following clinical interventions, together with their theoretical rationale and empirical support: (a) Having a therapeutic focus on what is occurring within the session itself, (b) Becoming aware of one's negative reactions toward the patient and transforming them into a more compassionate stance, and (c) Using procedures for enhancing emotional arousal in changing a patient's cognitive-affective distortions.

What should we expect from psychotherapy?

In addressing the very general question of what we should expect from psychotherapy, this article begins by discussing what constitutes relevant evidence on which to base the efficacy and effectiveness of psychotherapy. In this context, an important distinction is made between empirically supported treatments and evidence-based practice. Although there is evidence that psychotherapy does indeed work, there are also findings that there are times when our patients are harmed by our interventions. It is noted that the therapeutic alliance plays an extremely important role in the change process, and that ruptures in the alliance can contribute to our therapeutic failures. In pointing to directions for the future, modifications of how we investigate the outcome of treatment, as well as how to close the gap between research and practice, are offered.

What should we expect from psychotherapy?

In addressing the very general question of what we should expect from psychotherapy, this article begins by discussing what constitutes relevant evidence on which to base the efficacy and effectiveness of psychotherapy. In this context, an important distinction is made between empirically supported treatments and evidence-based practice. Although there is evidence that psychotherapy does indeed work, there are also findings that there are times when our patients are harmed by our interventions. It is noted that the therapeutic alliance plays an extremely important role in the change process, and that ruptures in the alliance can contribute to our therapeutic failures. In pointing to directions for the future, modifications of how we investigate the outcome of treatment, as well as how to close the gap between research and practice, are offered.

The relationship between experiences of discrimination and mental health among lesbians and gay men: An examination of internalized homonegativity and rejection sensitivity as potential mechanisms.

OBJECTIVE: The current study used path analysis to examine potential mechanisms through which experiences of discrimination influence depressive and social anxiety symptoms. METHOD: The sample included 218 lesbians and 249 gay men (total N = 467) who participated in an online survey about minority stress and mental health. The proposed model included 2 potential mediators-internalized homonegativity and rejection sensitivity-as well as a culturally relevant antecedent to experiences of discrimination-childhood gender nonconformity. RESULTS: Results indicated that the data fit the model well, supporting the mediating roles of internalized homonegativity and rejection sensitivity in the associations between experiences of discrimination and symptoms of depression and social anxiety. Results also supported the role of childhood gender nonconformity as an antecedent to experiences of discrimination. Although there were not significant gender differences in the overall model fit, some of the associations within the model were significantly stronger for gay men than lesbians. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest potential mechanisms through which experiences of discrimination influence well-being among sexual minorities, which has important implications for research and clinical practice with these populations.

Bridging the gap between clinical research and clinical practice: introduction to the special section.

This Special Section, developed by the American Psychology Association's Division 12 (Clinical) 2011 Committee on Science and Practice, highlights different ideas to help bridge the gap between clinical research and clinical practice, and notes recent innovations that help make research-practice integration feasible. The articles consider how to break down the barriers to enhance researcher-practitioner dialogue, as well as how to make ongoing outcome assessment feasible for clinicians. Moreover, the articles address how to promote training in evidence-based practice, and how to translate efficacy research into clinical practice and clinical insight into empirical study to better establish a two-way bridge between research and practice. Ultimately, we hope this series can speak to many different types of psychologists, whether they work mainly as researchers or practitioners, so they can see new ways to integrate and learn from both research and practice.