Cited by 99Psychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsPsychological Treatments and AssessmentsCounseling Practices and Supervision

The Science and Practice of Case Conceptualization

Open access
Kuyken, Willem, Padesky, Christine A., Dudley, Robert·2008·Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy

Abstract

Case conceptualization is a foundation of cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) because it describes and explains clients' presentations in ways that inform interventions. Yet the evidence base challenges the claimed benefits of case conceptualization. This paper reviews the rationale and evidence base for case conceptualization and outlines a new approach that uses the metaphor of a case conceptualization crucible in which a client's particular history, experience and strengths are synthesized with theory and research to produce an original and unique account of clients' presenting issues. The crucible metaphor illustrates three key defining principles of case conceptualization. First, heat drives chemical reactions in a crucible. In our model, collaborative empiricism between therapist and client provides the heat. Second, like the chemical reaction in a crucible, conceptualization develops over time. Typically, it begins at more descriptive levels, later a conceptualization incorporates explanatory elements and, if necessary, it develops further to include a longitudinal explanation of how pre-disposing and protective factors influence client issues. Finally, new substances formed in a crucible are dependent on the chemical characteristics of the materials put into it. Rather than simply look at client problems, our model incorporates client strengths at every stage of the conceptualization process to more effectively alleviate client distress and promote resilience.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s1352465808004815

Cites

54 of 54 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kuyken, W., Padesky, C. A., & Dudley, R.
Affiliations
  • University of Exeter (GB)
  • Newcastle University (GB)
Corresponding author
Kuyken, Willem
Venue
Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy
Published
2008-11
Volume
36
Issue
6
Pages
757-768
ISSN
  • 1352-4658 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-1833
OpenAlex
W2007259326
Cited by
98
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 5
FWCI
3.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy (publishedVersion)
  • Newcastle University ePrints (Newcastle Univesity)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychological Treatments and Assessments
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Counseling Practices and Supervision
Keywords
case formulation, cognitive behavioral therapy, collaborative empiricism, client strengths, client distress, resilience

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