
What Can We Learn About Therapeutic Change From Case History Data? The Research Jury Method with the Couple Case of "Carl" and "Sandra"
Author(s) -
Arthur C. Bohart,
Lindsey Shenefiel,
Marco Alejandro
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
pragmatic case studies in psychotherapy
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 1553-0124
DOI - 10.14713/pcsp.v17i2.2096
Subject(s) - jury , psychology , psychotherapist , creativity , session (web analytics) , clinical psychology , social psychology , law , world wide web , political science , computer science
The purpose of this study was to explore the usefulness of using case history data to assess change in psychotherapy. This was a follow up to previous investigations utilizing a "research jury method" to evaluate psychotherapy outcome. Three judges studied the critical first five sessions of a ten session video of emotionally focused therapy with a couple, Carl and Sandra. They took intensive notes and then functioned as a "jury"” to evaluate the evidence. They concluded that the evidence from within the case history is strong that the couple changed for the better. The evidence also supported the conclusion that therapy contributed to the change, although, by their judgment, at the "preponderance of evidence" level. Finally, the evidence was used to evaluate how therapy contributed to change. It was concluded that the most likely factors contributed by the therapist were her helping the couple see that each other’s underlying intentions were positive, and by fostering their hope. Evidence also supported the contributions the clients themselves made through their taking responsibility for themselves, through their exploring their past experiences, and through their creativity. Limitations are discussed and conclusions for the evaluation of psychotherapy are drawn.