Premium
Person‐centred experiential therapy: Perceptions of trainers and developers
Author(s) -
Haake Rinda,
Hardy Gillian E.,
Barkham Michael
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
counselling and psychotherapy research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.38
H-Index - 32
eISSN - 1746-1405
pISSN - 1473-3145
DOI - 10.1002/capr.12398
Subject(s) - consistency (knowledge bases) , flexibility (engineering) , experiential learning , set (abstract data type) , medicine , population , compromise , psychology , medical education , pedagogy , computer science , political science , statistics , mathematics , environmental health , artificial intelligence , law , programming language
Background Top‐up training in person‐centred experiential therapy (PCET) was developed in 2011 and is offered, through four university centres, to counsellors working in Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) services in England. Research into PCET training has now gained more importance, with the implementation of the IAPT Data Set Version 2.0 in September 2020, which requires IAPT services to report on the qualifications of care personnel. Previous research has explored the experiences of PCET trainees, but there is a need to investigate similarities and differences in the views and experiences of other stakeholders in the PCET initiative. Method Ten trainers and developers of the model were interviewed, including the full population of those personnel currently delivering the training. The framework method was used in the analysis of transcripts. Findings Tensions were identified between the individualism of the person‐centred approach and the standardisation expected by IAPT. Participants recognised that manualisation of the PCET model was controversial, but welcomed the coherence of the model and the ability to articulate theory and practice. Practical differences between centres were identified in the delivery of training, raising the question of whether such differences reflect the individualism of the person‐centred approach and the flexibility of the model, or reveal a lack of consistency in the understanding and delivery of PCET nationally. Conclusions PCET training is an opportunity to improve the consistency of PCET therapists' theoretical understanding and practice, enhancing their status and opportunities for research. Differences between training centres may compromise this consistency.