English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

This paper compares the approaches to Sharon’s case presented in two articles that appear earlier in this module, my paper (Westerman, 2021a), which was based on Interpersonal Defense Theory, and the paper by Critchfield, Dobner-Pereira, and Stucker (2021a), which was based on Interpersonal Reconstructive Therapy (IRT). I begin by considering differences in general between the ways in which these two perspectives approach case formulation. I then turn to comparing the formulations of Sharon’s case based on the two perspectives. Among other things, this part of the paper contrasts IRT’s focus on copy processes and the Gift of Love with Interpersonal Defense Theory’s focus on functionalist processes that involve the temporal organization of the parts of noncoordinating defensive interpersonal patterns. The second half of the paper compares the treatment implications of the two approaches in general terms and as they relate to Sharon’s case in particular. Implications for treatment are discussed regarding both insight-oriented interventions and enacted interventions at the level of therapy relationship processes.

Comparing Interpersonal Defense Theory and Interpersonal Reconstructive Therapy and Their Views of Sharon’s Case