Comparative Studies of Psychotherapies: Is It True That "Everyone Has Won and All Must Have Prizes"?
Abstract
Tallies were made of outcomes of all resonably controlled comparisons of psychotherapies with each other and with other treatments. For comparisons of psychotherapy with each other, most studies found insignificant differences in proportions of patients who improved (though most patients benefited). This "tie score effect" did not apply to psychotherapies vs psychopharmacotherapies compared singly-psychotherapies did better. Combined treatments often did better than single treatments. Among the comparisons, only two specially beneficial matches between type of patient and type of treatment were found. Our explanations for the usual tie score effect emphasize the common components among psychotherapies, especially the helping relationship with a therapist. However, we believe the research does not justify the conclusion that we should randomly assign patients to treatments-research results are usually based on amount of improvement; "amount" may not disclose differences in quality of improvement from each treatment.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Psychotherapy trials are especially prone to bias due to allegiance bias.
“Psychotherapy trials are especially prone to bias due to”
From Psychological therapies for people with borderline personality disorder. (2012) · cites this paper as Luborsky 1975
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 86 · Cited by 1,485
- Authors
- Luborsky, L.
- Affiliations
- University of Pennsylvania (US)
- Corresponding author
- Luborsky, Lester
- Venue
- Archives of General Psychiatry
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 1975-08-01
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 995
- ISSN
- 0003-990X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1971728047
- Cited by
- 1,485
- References
- 86
- Citations by year
- 2026: 11 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 57 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 58 · 2020: 34 · 2019: 26 · 2018: 31 · 2017: 36 · 2016: 34 · 2015: 52 · 2014: 41 · 2013: 47 · 2012: 42
- FWCI
- 43.46
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Archives of General Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
- Keywords
- psychotherapy, comparative effectiveness, treatment outcomes, psychopharmacological treatment, combined psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy, helping relationship, patient-treatment matching, treatment allocation
- MeSH terms
- Behavior Therapy, Desensitization, Psychologic, Humans, Person-Centered Psychotherapy, Psychoanalytic Therapy, Psychophysiologic Disorders, Psychotherapy, Psychotherapy, Group, Schizophrenia, Time Factors
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review