As part of a regular discussion series, my dept. is discussing John
Horgan's screed against psychology:
Horgan, J. (1999). The undiscovered mind: how the human brain defies
replication, medication, and explanation. Psychological Science,
10(6), 470-474.
I am singularly unimpressed with his arguments about all areas except
psychotherapy. And given his dismal record in slanting his survey of
the other subfields, I am not ready to believe him that psychotherapy
is not worth the time.
So, I have the following questions to submit to the collective wisdom
of tips types:
1) I am aware of the meta-analyses of therapy that show the average
person receiving psychotherapy is better off than 80% of those not
receiving therapy. But these analyses mash all psychotherapy for all
problems into the same bin. Have there been more fine-grained
studies that match what are now considered appropriate therapies with
presenting problems (e.g. systematic desens. with specific phobia)?
Does this matching strategy increase the success rate?
2) I am also struck by the studies Horgan cites showing that
untrained-but-empathic others have as much effect on outcome as
trained psychotherapists. Is the "therapeutic alliance" all that
really matters, or do these studies miss something? I suspect this
answer is probably linked with the answer to question (1).
3) Finally, depression seems to be treatable with an 80% success rate
for drugs and a similar success rate for psychotherapy. Do these two
sets overlap completely. That is, are 20% of folks with depression
left with having electroshock as their last option? Also, does
electroshock move us substantially toward a 100% symptom relief rate?
Many thanks for any enlightenment you can shed.
-Chuck
- Chuck Huff Psychology Department
- Associate Professor St.Olaf College
- Tutor in the Paracollege 1520 St. Olaf Avenue
- 507.646.3169 Fax: 646.3774 Northfield, MN 55057-1098
- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.stolaf.edu/people/huff/
