Empirically supported treatments in psychotherapy: Towards an evidence-based or evidence-biased psychology in clinical settings?

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

The field of research and practice in psychotherapy has been deeply influenced by two different approaches: the empirically supported treatments (ESTs) movement, linked with the evidence-based medicine (EBM) perspective and the "Common Factors" approach, typically connected with the "Dodo Bird Verdict". About the first perspective, since 1998 a list of ESTs has been established in mental health field. Criterions for "well-established" and "probably efficacious" treatments have arisen. The development of these kinds of paradigms was motivated by the emergence of a "managerial" approach and related systems for remuneration also for mental health providers and for insurance companies. In this article ESTs will be presented underlining also some possible criticisms. Finally complementary approaches, that could add different evidence in the psychotherapy research in comparison with traditional EBM approach, are presented.

Original languageEnglish
Article numberArticle 27
JournalFrontiers in Psychology
Issue numberJUL
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2010

Keywords

  • Common factors
  • Empirically supported treatments
  • Evidence based medicine
  • Evidence based psychology
  • Psychotherapy research

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychology(all)

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Empirically supported treatments in psychotherapy: Towards an evidence-based or evidence-biased psychology in clinical settings?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this