Are all psychological treatments for psychosis equal? The need for CBT in the treatment of psychosis and not for psychodynamic psychotherapy

Authors: Tarrier N.1; Haddock G.1; Barrowclough C.1; Wykes T.2

Source: Psychology and Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice, Volume 75, Number 4, December 2002 , pp. 365-374(10)

Purchase options

Article Access Options

The full text electronic article is available for purchase. You will be able to download the full text electronic article after payment.

$24.40 plus tax      Refund Policy

OR

 
More like this?

Abstract:

Paley and Shapiro conclude in their review (Paley & Shapiro, 2002) that there is clear evidence that cognitive-behaviour therapy (CBT) results in clear clinical benefits for people with schizophrenia. They argue that this research could be informed by the wider psychotherapy literature, specifically the 'equivalence paradox' and 'investigator allegiance', and that psychodynamic treatments for schizophrenia should be investigated and evaluated. We argue that their review of the literature is incomplete. We conclude that there is little evidence to support the 'equivalence paradox' generally, and where it is suggested, as in depression, this is most likely an artefact. In schizophrenia, there is consistent evidence that supportive psychotherapy performs poorly in treating hallucinations. We argue for improved methodology in carrying out randomized controlled trials, which would minimize bias, such as from 'investigator allegiance'. We consider evaluation of psychodynamic psychotherapy to demonstrate equivalence to CBT as a low priority and unlikely ever to be attempted. We consider the research and clinical priorities to be the further developments of CBT and family intervention methods, which could have significant benefits for sufferers of schizophrenia and their carers.

Document Type: Research article

DOI: 10.1348/147608302321151871

Affiliations: 1: Academic Division of Clinical Psychology, School of Psychiatry and Behavioural Science, University of Manchester, UK 2: Department of Clinical Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, UK

The requested document is freely available to subscribers. Users without a subscription can purchase this article.

Sign in



 

 

Back to top


Journals Home | Accessibility | Text Only | Site Map | Contact Us | BPS Website

© Copyright 2000-2008 The British Psychological Society
The British Psychological Society is a charity registered in England and Wales, Registration Number : 229642 and a charity registered in Scotland, Registration Number : SC039452 - VAT Registration Number : 240 3937 76

End Page