Advertisement

Zusammenfassung

Verhaltenstherapie weist von ihren Prinzipien her ein besonderes Nahverhältnis zur Forschung auf: In so gut wie allen Versuchen zur Charakterisierung des Gegenstandsbereiches (z.B. Franks & Wilson, 1978) wird das systematische Vorgehen und die Evaluation von Effekten als ein zentrales Merkmal hervorgehoben. Die Perspektive der Forschung liegt dabei auf Prinzipien, Verfahren und Prozessen, die zur Veränderung von abweichendem bzw. klinisch-auffälligem Verhalten relevant sind.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literatur

  1. American Psychological Association (1981). Ethical principles of psychologists. American Psychologist, 36, 633–638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andrews, G. & Harvey, R. (1981). Does psychotherapy benefit neurotic patients? A reanalvsis of the Smith, Glass, and Miller data. Archives of General Psychiatry, 38, 1203–1208.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bandura, A. (1977) Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191–215.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bastine, R., Fiedler, P. & Kommer, D. (Hrsg.). (1989). Psychotherapeutische Prozeßforschung. Zeitschrift für Klinische Psychologie, 18 (Heft 4).Google Scholar
  5. Baumann, U. (Hrsg.). (1981). Indikation zur Psychotherapie. Perspektiven für Praxis und Forschung. München: Urban & Schwarzenberg.Google Scholar
  6. Baumann, U., Hecht, Ch. & Mackinger, H. (1984). Psychotherapieforschung: Unterschiedliche Perspektiven. In U. Baumann (Hrsg.), Psychotherapie: Makro-/Mikroperspek-tive. Göttingen: Hogrefe.Google Scholar
  7. Bergin, A. E. (1971). The evaluation of therapeutic outcomes. In A. E. Bergin & S. L. Garfield (Eds.), Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change: An empirical analysis. New York: J. Wiley.Google Scholar
  8. Bergin, A. E. & Garfield, S. L. (Eds.). (19711, 19944). Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change: An empirical analysis. New York: J. Wiley.Google Scholar
  9. Bergin, A. E. & Lambert, M. J. (1978). The evaluation of therapeutic outcomes. In S. L. Garfield & A. E. Bergin (Eds.), Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change (2nd. ed.). New York: J. Wiley.Google Scholar
  10. Berman, J. S. & Norton, N. C. (1985). Does professional training make a therapist more effective? Psychological Bulletin, 98, 401–407.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Beutler, L. E., Machado, P. P. P. & Neufeldt, S. A. (1994). Therapist variables. In: A. E. Bergin & S. L. Garfield (Eds.), Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change (4th ed.). New York: J. Wiley.Google Scholar
  12. Bühringer, G. & Hahlweg, K. (1986). Kosten-Nutzen Aspekte psychologischer Behandlung. Psychologische Rundschau, 37, 1–19.Google Scholar
  13. Bunge, M. (1967). Scientific research I: The search for system. II: The search for truth. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cook, T. D. & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentati-on. Design and analysis issues for field settings. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.Google Scholar
  15. D’Zurilla, T. J. & Goldfried, M. R. (1971). Problem solving and behavior modification. Journal of Abnormal Psychology78, 107–126.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Durlak, J. A. (1979). Comparative effectiveness of paraprofessional and professional helpers. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 80–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Emmelkamp, P. M. G. (1994). Behavior therapy with adults. In A. E. Bergin & S. L. Garfield (Eds.), Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change (4th ed.). New York: J. Wiley.Google Scholar
  18. Eysenck, H. (1952). The effects of psychotherapy: An evaluation. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 16, 319–324.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Eysenck, H. J. (1963). Behavior therapy, spontaneous remission and transference in neurotics. American Journal of Psychiatry, 119, 867–871.Google Scholar
  20. Eysenck, H. J. (1994). The outcome problem in psychotherapy: What have we learned? Behaviour Research and Therapy, 32, 477–495.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Faber, ER. & Haarstrick, R. (1994). Kommentar Psychotherapie-Richtlinien (3. Aufl.). Stuttgart: Jungjohann.Google Scholar
  22. Foa, E. B. & Emmelkamp, P. M. G. (Eds.) (1983). Failures in behavior therapy. New York: J. Wiley.Google Scholar
  23. Franks, C. M. & Wilson, G. T. (Eds.). (1978). Annual review of behavior therapy. Theory and practice1978. New York: Bruner/Mazel.Google Scholar
  24. Garfield, S. L. (1980). Psychotherapy. An eclectic approach. New York: J. Wiley.Google Scholar
  25. Garfield, S. L. (1994). Research on client variables in psychotherapy. In A. E. Bergin & S. L. Garfield (Eds.), Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change (4th ed.). New York: J. Wiley.Google Scholar
  26. Giles, T. R. (1983). Probable superiority of behavioral interventions — I: Traditional comparative outcome. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 14, 19–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Giles, T. R. (1993). Probable superiority of behavioral interventions — II: Empirical status of the equivalent therapies hypothesis. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 14, 189–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Grawe, K. (1992). Psychotherapieforschung zu Beginn der neunziger Jahre. Psychologische Rundschau, 43, 132–162.Google Scholar
  29. Grawe, K., Caspar, F. & Ambühl, H. (1990). Differentielle Psychotherapieforschung: Vier Therapieformen im Vergleich. Zeitschrift für Klinische Psychologie, 19 (4).Google Scholar
  30. Grawe, K., Donati, R. & Bernauer, F. (1994). Psychotherapie im Wandel. Von der Konfession zur Profession. Göttingen: Hogrefe.Google Scholar
  31. Hattie, J. A., Sharpley, C. F. & Rogers, H. J. (1984). Comparative effectiveness of professional and paraprofessional helpers. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 534–541.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Howard, K. I, Kopta, S. M., Krause, M. S. & Orlinsky, D. E. (1986). The dose-effect relationship in psychotherapy. American Psychologist, 41, 159–164.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kanfer, F. H., Reinecker, H. & Schmelzer, D. (1996). Selbstmanagement-Therapie. Ein Lehrbuch für die klinische Praxis. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  34. Kazdin, A. E. & Bass, D. (1989). Power to detect differences between alternative treatments in comparative psychotherapy outcome research. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 57, 138–147.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kazdin, A. E. & Wilson, G. T. (1978). Criteria for evaluating psychotherapy. Archives of General Psychiatry, 35, 407–416.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kazdin, A. E. (1980). Research design in clinical psychology. Needham Heights MA: Ayllyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  37. Kazdin, A. E. (1994). Methodology, design, and evaluation in psychotherapy research. In A. E. Bergin & S. L. Garfield (Eds.), Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change (4th. ed.). New York: J. Wiley.Google Scholar
  38. Kendall, P. C. & Norton-Ford, J. D. (1982). Therapy outcome research methods. In P. C. Kendall & J. N. Butcher (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in clinical psychology. New York: J. Wiley.Google Scholar
  39. Kiesler, D. J. (1966). Some myths of psychotherapy research and the search for a paradigm. Psychological Bulletin, 1966, 65, 110–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kiesler, D. J. (1971). Experimental designs in psychotherapy research. In A. E. Bergin & S. L. Garfield (Eds.), Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change. New York: J. Wiley.Google Scholar
  41. Kimble, G. A. (1961). Hilgard and Marquis’ Conditioning and learning. New York: Appleton.Google Scholar
  42. Lambert, M. J. & Bergin A. E. (1994). The effectiveness of psychotherapy. In A. E. Bergin & S. L. Garfield (Eds.), Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change (4th ed.). New York: J. Wiley.Google Scholar
  43. Lambert, M. J., Bergin, A. E. & Collins, J. L. (1977). Therapist induced deterioration in psychotherapy. In A. S. Gurman & A. M. Razin (Eds.), Effective psychotherapy. A handbook of research. New York: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
  44. Lang, P. J. (1971). The application of psychophysiological methods to the study of psychotherapy and behavior change. In A. E. Bergin & S. L. Garfield (Eds.), Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change. An empirical analysis. New York: J. Wiley.Google Scholar
  45. Lipsey, M. W. & Wilson, D. B. (1993). The efficacy of psychological, educational, and behavioral treatment. Confirmation from meta-analysis. American Psychologist, 48, 1181–1209.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Luborsky, L, Singer, B. & Luborsky, L. (1975). Comparative studies of psychotherapies: Is it true that everyone has won and all must have prices?« Archives of General Psychiatry, 32, 995–1008.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Mahoney, M. J. (1976). Scientist as subject: The psychological imperative. Cambridge MA: Ballinger.Google Scholar
  48. Margraf, J. & Schneider, S. (1990). Panik. Angstanfälle und ihre Behandlung. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  49. Margraf, J., Ehlers, A., Roth, W. T., Clark, D. C., Sheikh, J., Agras, W. S. & Taylor, C. B. (1991). How »blind« are double-blind studies? Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 59, 184–187.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Mathews, A. M., Gelder, M. G. & Johnston, D.: . (1981). Agoraphobia: Nature and treatment. London: Tavistock.Google Scholar
  51. Mays, D. T. & Franks, C. M. (Eds.).(1985). Negative outcome in psychotherapy and what to do about it. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  52. McNeilly, Ch. L. & Howard, K. I. (1991). The effects of psychotherapy: A re-evaluation based on dosage. Psychotherapy Research, 1, 74–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Meyer, A. E., Richter, R., Grawe, K., Schulenburg, J. M. v. der & Schulte, B. (1991). Forschungsgutachten zu Fragen eines Psychotherapeutengesetzes. Bonn: Gesundheitsministerium.Google Scholar
  54. Nicholson, R. A. & Berman, J. S. (1983). Is follow-up necessary in evaluating psychotherapy? Psychological Bulletin, 93, 261–278.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Orlinsky, D. E., Grawe, K. & Parks, B. K. (1994). Process and outcome in psychotherapy. In A. E. Bergin & S. L. Garfield (Eds.), Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change (4th ed.). New York: J. Wiley.Google Scholar
  56. Perrez, M. (1982). Was nützt die Psychotherapie? Psychologische Rundschau, 33, 121–126.Google Scholar
  57. Petermann, F. (1982). Einzelfalldiagnose und klinische Praxis. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.Google Scholar
  58. Popper, K. R. (1979). Ausgangspunkte. Meine intellektuelle Entwicklung. Hamburg: Hoffmann & Campe.Google Scholar
  59. Rachman, S. J. & Wilson, G. T. (1980). The effects of psychological therapy. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
  60. Reinecker, H., Schiepek, G. & Gunzelmann, T. (1989) Integration von Forschungsergebnissen: Meta-Analysen in der Psychotherapieforschung. Zeitschrift für Klinische Psychologie, 18, 101–116.Google Scholar
  61. Rescorla, R. A. (1988). Pavlo vian conditioning: Its not what you think it is. American Psychologist, 43, 151–160.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Rief, W. (1994). Ein Plädoyer für eine praxisorientierte Psychotherapieforschung. Report Psychologie, 19, 16–19.Google Scholar
  63. Rosenthal, R. (1983). Assessing the statistical and social importance of the effects of psychotherapy. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 51, 4–13.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Russell, R. L. (Ed.). (1989). Psychotherapy process research. Clinical Psychology Review (Special Issue). 9 (Nr. 4).Google Scholar
  65. Schaap, C., Bennun, I., Schindler, L. & Hoogduin, K. (1993). The therapeutic relationship in behavioural psychotherapy. New York: J. Wiley.Google Scholar
  66. Schindler, L. (1991). Die empirische Analyse der therapeutischen Beziehung. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Schindler, L. (1995). Prozeßforschung. In: A. Ehlers & K. Hahlweg (Hrsg.), Enzyklopädie der Psychologie. Klinische Psychologie (Bd. 1). Göttingen: Hogrefe.Google Scholar
  68. Schulte, D. (1993). Wie soll Therapieerfolg gemessen werden? Zeitschrift für Klinische Psychologie, 22, 374–393.Google Scholar
  69. Seidenstücker, G. (1984). Indikation in der Psychotherapie. In L. R. Schmidt (Hrsg.), Lehrbuch der Klinischen Psychologie (2. Aufl.). Stuttgart: Enke.Google Scholar
  70. Shapiro, D. A. (1985). Recent applications of meta-analysis in clinical research. Clinical Psychology Review, 5, 13–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Shapiro, D. A. & Shapiro, D. (1982). Meta-analysis of comparative therapy outcome research: A critical appraisal. Behavioural Psychotherapy, 10, 4–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Sloane, R. B., Staples, F. R., Cristol, A. H., Yorkston, N. J. & Whipple, K. (1975). Short-term analytically oriented psychotherapy versus behavior therapy. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  73. Smith, M. L. & Glass, G. V. (1977). Meta-analysis of psychotherapy. American Psychologist, 41, 165–180.Google Scholar
  74. Smith, M. L., Glass, G. V. & Miller, T. I. (1980). The benefits of psychotherapy. Baltimore/MD: John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  75. Stegmüller, W. (1974). Wissenschaftliche Erklärung und Begründung. Probleme und Resultate der Wissenschaftstheorie und Analytischen Philosophie (Bd. 1). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  76. Stiles, W. B. & Shapiro, D. A.(1989). Abuse of the drug metaphor in psychotherapy process-outcome research. Clinical Psychology Review, 9, 521–543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Stiles, W. B., Shapiro, D. A. & Elliott, R. (1986). »Are all psychotherapies equivalent?« American Psychologist, 41, 165–180.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Strupp, H. H. & Hadley, S. W. (1977). A tripartite model of mental health and therapeutic outcomes. With special reference to negative effects in psychotherapy. American Psychologist, 32, 187–196.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Strupp, H. H., Hadley, S. W. & Gomes-Schwartz, B. (1977)Psychotherapy for better or worse: The problem of negative effects. New York: Aronson.Google Scholar
  80. Sweet, A. A. & Loizeaux, A. L. (1991). Behavioral and cognitive treatment methods: A critical comparative review. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 22, 159–185.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Vandenbos, G. R. (Ed.). (1980). Psychotherapy: Practice, research, policy. Beverly Hills/CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  82. Verhaltensmodifikation und Verhaltensmedizin (1989). Themenheft »Placebo« [Hrsg.: Ch. Reinecker-Hecht]. 10, Heft 4.Google Scholar
  83. Weingartner, P. (1971). Wissenschaftstheorie I. Einführung in die Hauptprobleme. Stuttgart: Fromann-Holzboog.Google Scholar
  84. Westmeyer, H. (1981). Allgemeine methodologische Probleme der Indikation in der Psychotherapie. In U. Baumann (Hrsg.), Indikation zur Psychotherapie. Perspektiven für Praxis und Forschung. München: Urban & Schwarzenberg.Google Scholar
  85. White, L., Tursky, B. & Schwartz, G. E. (Eds.) (1985). Placebo: Theory, research, and mechanisms. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  86. Wilkins, W. (1986). Placebo problems in psychotherapy research. Social psychological alternatives to chemotherapy concepts. American Psychologist, 41, 551–556.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Wipplinger, R. & Reinecker, H. (1994). Zur Normenproblematik in der Verhaltenstherapie. Bergheim: Mackinger-Verlag.Google Scholar
  88. Yates, A. J. (1976). Research methods in behavior modification. In M. Hersen, R. M. Eisler & P. M. Miller (Eds.), Progress in behavior modification (Vol. 2). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  89. Yates, B. T. (1985). Cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analysis: An introduction. Behavioral Assessment, 7, 207–234.Google Scholar

Weiterführende Literatur

  1. Bergin, A. E. & Garfield, S. L. (Eds.). (1994). Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change: An empirical analysis. 4th edn. New York: J. Wiley.Google Scholar
  2. Cook, T. D. & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentati-on. Design and analysis issues for field settings. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.Google Scholar
  3. Grawe, K., Donati, R. & Bernauer, F. (1994). Psychotherapie im Wandel. Von der Konfession zur Profession. Göttingen: Hogrefe.Google Scholar
  4. Kazdin, A. E. (1980). Research design in clinical psychology. Needham Heights MA: Ayllyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  5. Schindler, L. (1995). Prozeßforschung. In: A. Ehlers & K. Hahlweg (Hrsg.), Enzyklopädie der Psychologie. Klinische Psychologie (Bd. 1). Göttingen: Hogrefe.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hans Reinecker

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations