The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Interventive Interviewing: Part II. Reflexive Questioning as a Means to Enable Self‐Healing
Abstract
Reflexive questioning is an aspect of interventive interviewing oriented toward enabling clients or families to generate new patterns of cognition and behavior on their own. The therapist adopts a facilitative posture and deliberately asks those kinds of questions that are liable to open up new possibilities for self‐healing. The mechanism for the resultant therapeutic change in clients is postulated to be reflexivity between levels of meaning within their own belief systems. By adopting this mode of enquiry and taking advantage of opportunities to ask a variety of reflexive questions, a therapist may be able to augment the clinical effectiveness of his or her interviews.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Holland, R. (1999) · Human Relations · doi:10.1177/001872679905200403 · Cited by 139
Bostock, L., Patrizio, L., Godfrey, T., & Forrester, D. (2022) · Children and Youth Services Review · doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2022.106652 · Cited by 21
Metadata
- Authors
- TOMM, K.
- Venue
- Family Process
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1987-06
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 167-183
- ISSN
- 0014-7370 (ISSN-L)
- 1545-5300
- OpenAlex
- W2108177400
- Cited by
- 478
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 14.86
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
