Cited by 36Psychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology ResearchCounseling Practices and Supervision

Exceeding the therapeutic zone of proximal development as a clinical error.

Open access
Stiles, William B., Caro Gabalda, Isabel, Ribeiro, Eugénia·2016·Psychotherapy

Abstract

The Assimilation of Problematic Experiences Scale (APES) summarizes a developmental continuum along which psychological problems progress in successful psychotherapy. The therapeutic zone of proximal development (TZPD) is the segment of the APES continuum within which the clients can proceed from their current APES level to the next with the therapist's assistance. It is the therapeutic working zone for a particular problem. As the client makes progress on a problem, its TZPD shifts up the APES. Theoretically, so long as the therapist's interventions remain within the TZPD, the client feels safe enough to work. However, when an intervention aims beyond the upper limit, the client will find it too risky and will reject or avoid the proposal. In this sense, exceeding the TZPD can be considered as a clinical error. This article presents examples of exceeding the TZPD and ways the error can be repaired. (PsycINFO Database Record

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/pst0000061

Cites

16 of 16 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?

  • Pressure to disclose can be conceptualized within a zone of proximal development framework: too little or too much pressure is unhelpful, but a balance between safety and challenge facilitates growth.

    “Pressure to disclose can be conceptualized within a zone of the proximal development framework.Too little or too much pressure is unhelpful, but when there is a balance between safety and challenge, the discloser can risk exploring new beliefs and previously problematic experiences can become enriching, thus facilitating growth (Stiles et al., 2016).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Stiles, W. B., Caro Gabalda, I., & Ribeiro, E.
Affiliations
  • Miami University (US)
  • University of Minho (PT)
Venue
Psychotherapy
Published
2016-09
Volume
53
Issue
3
Pages
268-272
ISSN
  • 0033-3204 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1536
OpenAlex
W2520858491
Cited by
36
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 3
FWCI
6.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc-nd
Locations
  • Psychotherapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Portuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT) (submittedVersion)
  • Portuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • University of Minho (UID/PSI/01662/2013)
  • Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology
  • Portuguese Ministry of Science, Technology, and Higher Education
  • FEDER (POCI-01-0145-FEDER-007653)
  • BIAL Foundation
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Counseling Practices and Supervision
Keywords
zone of proximal development, medical errors, client safety, error repair
MeSH terms
Adult, Awareness, Mental Disorders, Humans, Male, Problem Solving, Professional-Patient Relations, Psychotherapy, Psychotherapeutic Processes, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Treatment Outcome, Medical Errors

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