Psychotherapy research: Functions and functionality

Ryle (1995) sets out to tell us where, in his view, psychotherapy research has failed the practitioner and how it might best be improved so as to have “relevance to, and impact on, clinical practice” (p. 113)-Certainly we know that practicing psychotherapists are little influenced by the research literature (e.g., Cohen et al., 1986; Morrow-Bradley & Elliott, 1986). Reasons suggested include lack of clinical relevance, inadequate specifications of procedures and treatment populations, overemphasis on group statistics and statistical significance, and time pressures on busy practitioners. However, Strupp (1986) raises a more fundamental question: What kind of influence can we expect research to have on practice? He goes on to suggest that perhaps it is primarily influential in promoting an open-minded, tentative clinical stance, an ability to entertain alternative hypotheses, and a respect for evidence. Perhaps we should not expect it to impinge directly on clinical practice. Similarly, Lambert and Bergin (1994) attribute the continuing shift toward eclecticism among (American) practitioners to the influence of research findings of outcome equivalence across therapies. © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.