Contemporary Family Therapy

, Volume 16, Issue 1, pp 39–52 | Cite as

Therapeutic change in couples' therapy: Critical change incidents perceived by therapists and clients

  • Linda Wark
The Contemporary Scence: Theory and Research

Abstract

Clients' perceptions of change in therapy have been virtually ignored in research on therapeutic change. An initial study was conducted which examined client couples' and their therapists' views of change in couples' therapy using the Critical Incident Technique. The data were analyzed inductively, and categories emerged which provide initial descriptions of important positive and negative events of therapy. The findings indicated that therapists' views of what was helpful and not helpful to therapeutic change diverged greatly from their clients' views. Implications for therapy are discussed.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Auerswald, E. H. (1988). Epistemological confusion and outcome research. In L. C. Wynne (Ed.),The state of the art in family therapy research: Controversies and recommendations (pp. 55–72). New York: Family Process Press.Google Scholar
  2. Deal, J. E., Wampler, K. S., & Halverson, C. F. (1992). The importance of similarity in the marital relationship.Family Process, 31, 369–382.Google Scholar
  3. Fine, M., & Norris, J. E. (1989). Intergenerational relations and family therapy research: What we can learn from other disciplines.Family Process, 28, 301–316.Google Scholar
  4. Flanagan, J. C. (1954). The critical incident technique.Psychological Bulletin, 51, 61–70.Google Scholar
  5. Greenberg, L.S., James, P.S., and Conry, R.F. (1988). Perceived change processes in emotionally focused couples therapy.Journal of Family Psychology, 2, 5–23.Google Scholar
  6. Greenberg, L. S., and Pinsof, W. M. (1986). Process research: Current trends and future perspectives. In L. S. Greenberg & W. Pinsof (Eds.),The psychotherapeutic process: A research handbook (pp. 3–20). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  7. Gurman, A. S., & Kniskern, D. P. (1981). Family therapy outcome research: Knowns and unknowns. In A. S. Gurman & D. P. Kniskern (Eds)Handbook of family therapy (pp. 742–775). New York: Brunner/Mazel.Google Scholar
  8. Heath, A. W., McKenna, B. C., & Atkinson, B. J. (1988). Toward the identification of variables for evaluating family therapy workshops.Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 14, 267–276.Google Scholar
  9. Jacobson, N. S. (1981). Behavioral marital therapy. In A. S. Gurman & D. P. Kniskern (Eds.)Handbook of family therapy (pp. 556–591). New York: Brunner/Mazel.Google Scholar
  10. Kantor, D., & Andreozzi, L. L. (1985). The cybernetics of family therapy and family therapy research. In L. L. Andreozzi (Ed.),Integrating research and clinical practice (pp. 37–50). Rockville, MD: Aspen Systems Corporation.Google Scholar
  11. Kantor, D., & Neal, D. H. (1985). Integrative shifts for the theory and practice of family systems therapy.Family Process, 24, 13–30.Google Scholar
  12. Kniskern, D. P. (1985). Climbing out of the pit: Further guidelines for family therapy research.Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 11, 159–162.Google Scholar
  13. Minuchin, S., & Fishman, H. C. (1981).Family therapy techniques. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Pinsof, W. M. (1989). A conceptual framework and methodological criteria for family therapy process research.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 57, 53–59.Google Scholar
  15. Reiss, D. (1988). Theoretical versus tactical inferences: Or, how to do family psychotherapy research without dying of boredom. In L. C. Wynne (Ed.),The state of the art in family therapy research: Controversies and recommendations (pp. 33–45). New York: Family Process Press.Google Scholar
  16. Reiss, D., Costell, R., Jones, C., & Berkman, H. (1980). The family meets the hospital: A laboratory forecast of the encounter.Archives of General Psychiatry, 37, 141–154.Google Scholar
  17. Reiss, D., & Oliveri, N. E. (1991). The family's conception of accountability and competence: A new approach to the conceptualization and assessment of family stress.Family Process, 30, 193–214.Google Scholar
  18. Satir, V (1964)Conjoint family therapy: A guide to theory and technique. Palo Alto, CA: Science and Behavior Books.Google Scholar
  19. Wynne, L. C. (1988). An overview of the state of the art: What should be expected in current family therapy research. In L. C. Wynne (Ed.),The state of the art in family therapy research: Controversies and recommendations (pp. 249–266). New York: Family Process Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Human Sciences Press, Inc. 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Linda Wark
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Family Relations and Human DevelopmentThe Ohio State UniversityColumbus

Personalised recommendations