CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 27Psychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology ResearchPsychology, Coaching, and Therapy

Psychodynamic psychotherapy, insight, and therapeutic action

Lacewing, Michael·2014·Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice
DOI 10.1111/cpsp.12065
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

It has often been observed that, in general, different psychotherapies do equally well. Some have taken this as good evidence that therapeutic action in psychotherapy rests not on the factors specific to individual therapies, but on common factors. I argue against this view in favor of a theory of therapeutic action deriving from psychodynamic psychotherapy. This identifies the therapeutic relationship (and with it, many so-called common factors) and ‘psychodynamic insight’ as therapeutic factors. I review the evidence from outcome studies and from studies into two concepts related to insight, viz. reflection function and psychological defense. I argue that the best interpretation of the evidence supports the claim that insight, in interrelation with the therapeutic relationship, contributes to therapeutic action.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/cpsp.12065

Cites

162 of 162 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • Interactions with a chatbot implementing CBT techniques might put a user in a better position to recognize the connections between one's emotions, motivations, thoughts, and behavior, past and present, including one's interpretations of and relations with others, which is arguably at least an element of acquiring self-understanding.

    “as we argue in (58), interactions with a chatbot implementing CBT techniques might put a user in a better position to recognize “the connections between one’s emotions, motivations, thoughts, and behavior, past and present, including one’s interpretations of and relations with others” (59) (pp. 154–5), which is arguably at least an element of the process of acquiring self-understanding.”

    From Waiting for a digital therapist: three challenges on the path to psychotherapy delivered by artificial intelligence (2023) · cites this paper as [59]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 165 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Lacewing, M.
Affiliations
Heythrop College, University of London (GB)
Corresponding author
Lacewing, Michael
Venue
Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
2014-06
Volume
21
Issue
2
Pages
154-171
ISSN
  • 0969-5893 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-2850
DOI
10.1111/cpsp.12065
OpenAlex
W2146550906
Semantic Scholar
0af3c2c315eb3034bdbff53f038e665c04bc0320
Cited by
27
References
165
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2015: 1
FWCI
1.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1 (tdm, 457 d)
Locations
Clinical Psychology Science and Practice (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Psychology, Coaching, and Therapy
Keywords
psychodynamic psychotherapy, therapeutic action, insight, therapeutic relationship, common factors, reflection function, defense mechanisms, psychotherapy outcome

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