Cited by 211Psychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesDigital Mental Health Interventions

Mechanisms of change in psychotherapy for depression: An empirical update and evaluation of research aimed at identifying psychological mediators

Open access
Lemmens, Lotte H.J.M., Müller, Viola N.L.S., Arntz, Arnoud, Huibers, Marcus J.H.·2016·Clinical Psychology Review

Abstract

We present a systematic empirical update and critical evaluation of the current status of research aimed at identifying a variety of psychological mediators in various forms of psychotherapy for depression. We summarize study characteristics and results of 35 relevant studies, and discuss the extent to which these studies meet several important requirements for mechanism research. Our review indicates that in spite of increased attention for the topic, advances in theoretical consensus about necessities for mechanism research, and sophistication of study designs, research in this field is still heterogeneous and unsatisfactory in methodological respect. Probably the biggest challenge in the field is demonstrating the causal relation between change in the mediator and change in depressive symptoms. The field would benefit from a further refinement of research methods to identify processes of therapeutic change. Recommendations for future research are discussed. However, even in the most optimal research designs, explaining psychotherapeutic change remains a challenge. Psychotherapy is a multi-dimensional phenomenon that might work through interplay of multiple mechanisms at several levels. As a result, it might be too complex to be explained in relatively simple causal models of psychological change.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cpr.2016.09.004

Cites

77 of 77 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Our results align with other recent reviews in calling for further investigation and greater methodological rigor in order to identify specific mediators leading to positive change in psychotherapy for adolescents.

    “Despite multiple limitations, our results align with other recent reviews [28, 31, 33], in calling for further investigation and greater methodological rigor in order to identify specific mediators leading to positive change in psychotherapy for adolescents.”

    From Mediators of outcome in adolescent psychotherapy and their implications for theories and mechanisms of change: a systematic review (2024) · cites this paper as [28]

    The Discussion (page unavailable) calls for further research and more rigorous methods to identify mediators of change in psychotherapy for depression. The review includes studies of depressed adolescents, but its recommendations address depression psychotherapy broadly rather than psychotherapy for adolescents specifically. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Psychotherapy is a complex process involving multiple elements that most likely interact with one another, and simple causal models probably will not advance our understanding of how it works.

    “Moreover, by definition, psychotherapy is a complex process involving multiple elements that most likely interact with one another, and simple causal models probably will not advance our understanding of how it works (Lemmens et al. 2016, Lorenzo-Luaces & DeRubeis 2018).”

    From The Role of Common Factors in Psychotherapy Outcomes (2019) · cites this paper as Lemmens et al. 2016

    The Discussion describes psychotherapy for depression as a complex process involving interacting mechanisms and says it might be too complex for relatively simple causal models to explain. The citing sentence broadens this from psychotherapy for depression to psychotherapy generally and states the limitation of simple models more firmly than the source does. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Face-to-face and internet-based settings generally seem to share findings on relevant mechanisms of change.

    “While the face-to-face and internetbased setting generally seem to share findings on relevant mechanisms of change (e.g., for depression: Domhardt etal., 2020; Lemmens etal., 2016)”

    From Transdiagnostic Processes as Mediators of Change in an Internet-Delivered Intervention Based on the Unified Protocol (2022) · cites this paper as Lemmens et al., 2016

    Section 3.2.1 reports findings on potential mediators in online CBT and problem-solving therapy for depression, while section 3.1 summarizes mediator findings across the review's psychotherapy studies. The paper does not compare internet-based with face-to-face settings or conclude that their findings generally align; it also cautions that the online study could not establish the temporal order needed to identify a mechanism of change. No page number was supplied in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Several quality criteria of mediation studies outlined by Lemmens et al. (2016) could be established: an RCT with a control group, n > 40 per group, and assessment of several mediators.

    “While several other of the quality criteria of mediation studies outlined by Lemmens etal. (2016) could be established”

    From Transdiagnostic Processes as Mediators of Change in an Internet-Delivered Intervention Based on the Unified Protocol (2022) · cites this paper as Lemmens et al., 2016

    Section 2.2 (Data assessment) lists an RCT design, a control group, sufficient sample size, and multiple potential mediators as criteria. It defines sufficient sample size as n ≥ 40, whereas the claim says n > 40 per group; section 3.2 discusses sample size per condition but does not resolve that threshold difference. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Psychotherapy is a multi-dimensional phenomenon that might work through interplay of multiple mechanisms at several levels, and as a result, it might be too complex to be explained in relatively simple causal models of psychological change.

    “Psychotherapy is a multi‐dimensional phenomenon that might work through interplay of multiple mechanisms at several levels. As a result, it might be too complex to be explained in relatively simple causal models of psychological change (Lemmens et al. 2016).”

    From Exploring Moderators and Mediators of the Outcome of Group Cognitive Behavioural Therapy Compared With Group Schema Therapy for Social Anxiety Disorder and Comorbid Avoidant Personality Disorder. (2025) · cites this paper as Lemmens et al. 2016

    The Discussion says that psychotherapy for depression may involve interacting mechanisms at several levels and may be too complex for simple causal models of psychological change. The citing sentence closely paraphrases this point but omits the source’s restriction to depression, presenting it as a claim about psychotherapy generally. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Klug, G., Henrich, G., Filipiak, B., & Huber, D. (2012). Trajectories and mediators of change in psychoanalytic, psychodynamic, and cognitive behavioral therapy. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 60(3), 598-605.
  2. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2001). Mplus user's guide (2 ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
  3. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2007). Mplus user's guide (6 ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
  4. Schlesselman, J. J. (1982). Case-control studies: Design, conduct and analysis. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lemmens, L. H. J. M., Müller, V. N. L. S., Arntz, A., & Huibers, M. J. H.
Affiliations
  • Maastricht University (NL)
  • Universität Trier (DE)
Corresponding author
Lemmens, Lotte H.J.M.
Venue
Clinical Psychology Review
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-12
Volume
50
Pages
95-107
ISSN
0272-7358 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2523667356
Cited by
211
References
75
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 40 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 10
FWCI
2.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Clinical Psychology Review (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Publications (Maastricht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • VU Research Portal (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
Keywords
psychotherapy for depression, mechanisms of change, psychological mediators, therapeutic change, causal inference, mediation analysis, methodological quality, depressive symptoms
MeSH terms
Depression, Depressive Disorder, Humans, Psychotherapy

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