Cited by 164Psychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsCounseling, Therapy, and Family DynamicsPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research

Client perceptions of significant events in prescriptive and exploratory periods of individual therapy

Llewelyn, Susan P., Elliott, Robert, Shapiro, David A., Hardy, Gillian, Firth‐Cozens, Jenny·1988·British Journal of Clinical Psychology

Abstract

This study compared the impact of helpful and hindering events, as perceived by 40 clients, in two forms of psychotherapy: an exploratory, relationship‐oriented therapy, and a prescriptive, cognitive/behavioural therapy. All clients received eight sessions of each type of treatment in a crossover design. Events were obtained by self‐report both during and at the end of each period, and content analysed for type of therapeutic impact by three trained raters. Results showed that during treatment the most commonly occurring helpful impacts across both types of treatments were ‘problem solution’, ‘awareness’ and ‘reassurance’, while the most commonly occurring hindering impact was ‘unwanted thoughts’. Similar impacts were reported at the end of each period, with the addition of ‘personal contact’. In addition, it was found that ‘problem solution’ and ‘reassurance’ impacts were more commonly reported in prescriptive treatment, whereas ‘awareness’ and ‘personal contact’ impacts were more prevalent in exploratory treatment. Only the prevalence of ‘unwanted thoughts’ was correlated (negatively) with outcome. Some possible reasons for the lack of correlation between reported impacts and outcome are suggested.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.2044-8260.1988.tb00758.x

Cites

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?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Llewelyn, S. P., Elliott, R., Shapiro, D. A., Hardy, G., & Firth‐Cozens, J.
Affiliations
  • Dorset HealthCare University NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
  • University of Toledo (US)
  • University of Sheffield (GB)
  • University of Leicester (GB)
Venue
British Journal of Clinical Psychology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1988-05
Volume
27
Issue
2
Pages
105-114
ISSN
  • 0144-6657 (ISSN-L)
  • 2044-8260
OpenAlex
W2021508634
Cited by
164
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 6 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 6
FWCI
3.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • British Journal of Clinical Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Society for Psychotherapy Research
  • British Psychological Society
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Counseling, Therapy, and Family Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
Keywords
individual psychotherapy, cognitive behavioral therapy, problem solutions, awareness, reassurance, intrusive thoughts, personal contact, treatment outcomes, therapeutic impact
MeSH terms
Anxiety Disorders, Behavior Therapy, Cognition, Depressive Disorder, Humans, Professional-Patient Relations, Psychoanalytic Therapy, 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