Premium
A discourse analysis of power in relation to PSYCHLOPS (Psychological outcome profiles) in the context of CBT for psychosis
Author(s) -
Kelly Vikki,
Holttum Sue,
Evans Chris,
Shepherd Melanie
Publication year - 2012
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 - 10.1080/14733145.2012.672439
Subject(s) - context (archaeology) , psychology , outcome (game theory) , psychotherapist , power (physics) , service (business) , therapeutic relationship , psychosis , applied psychology , social psychology , psychiatry , business , paleontology , physics , mathematics , mathematical economics , quantum mechanics , marketing , biology
Aims: Outcome measures (OMs) and routine change measurement have developed dramatically in psychological therapies over the last two decades and some therapists have expressed concerns that this, depending on how it is handled by the parties involved, can markedly affect the therapy. However, little research has investigated this. It therefore seemed timely to explore discourses of OMs drawn upon by both parties in the therapy room. Method: PSYCHLOPS (Psychological Outcome Profiles) is a client‐centred measure which offered an opportunity to explore how therapists and clients receiving CBT for psychosis talked about OMs. A useful contrast was provided by the CORE‐OM (Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation‐Outcome Measure). The discourses drawn upon by clients ( n =4) and therapists ( n =4) were analysed, informed by a Foucaultian framework. Results: OMs were constructed as empowering or disempowering of clients, as being able to do therapeutic work of engagement and containment, and as part of the apparatus of service power, positioning therapists as relatively powerless to question their use. Discussion: It is suggested that client‐centred measures like PSYCHLOPS, although partly aligned with a recovery framework, may become part of top‐down state and service power, and there is a need for more research into the different ways in which OMs are used in therapy and the impacts on therapists, clients and their relationships.