Process Transforms Inputs to Determine Outcomes: Therapists Are Responsible for Managing Process
Identifieur interne : 001558 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 001557; suivant : 001559Process Transforms Inputs to Determine Outcomes: Therapists Are Responsible for Managing Process
Auteurs : Merton S. Krause ; Wolfgang LutzSource :
- Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice [ 0969-5893 ] ; 2009-03.
English descriptors
- KwdEn :
Abstract
The variance in outcomes for psychotherapy patients is not partitionable into components that are independent contributions of treatments, therapists, and patients. If these inputs did not influence one another over the course of psychotherapy, they could be independent and so have additive main‐effects or interaction‐effects on outcomes. But that is impossible because they do influence one another and therapists are responsible for actively managing the psychotherapy process by repeatedly adjusting these inputs toward optimally influencing one another. The consequent interdependence of these inputs within the therapy process needs to be reflected in the design and analysis of psychotherapy outcome studies, as it presently is not, if we are to learn who is adequate for treating whom, how, and why so.
Url:
DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2850.2009.01146.x
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:79964AF79822E6E26E51D297DD80CFB8504E806DLe document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Process Transforms Inputs to Determine Outcomes: Therapists Are Responsible for Managing Process</title><author><name sortKey="Krause, Merton S" sort="Krause, Merton S" uniqKey="Krause M" first="Merton S." last="Krause">Merton S. Krause</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Northwestern University</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Lutz, Wolfgang" sort="Lutz, Wolfgang" uniqKey="Lutz W" first="Wolfgang" last="Lutz">Wolfgang Lutz</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>University of Trier</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:79964AF79822E6E26E51D297DD80CFB8504E806D</idno><date when="2009" year="2009">2009</date><idno type="doi">10.1111/j.1468-2850.2009.01146.x</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/79964AF79822E6E26E51D297DD80CFB8504E806D/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">001558</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">001558</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Process Transforms Inputs to Determine Outcomes: Therapists Are Responsible for Managing Process</title><author><name sortKey="Krause, Merton S" sort="Krause, Merton S" uniqKey="Krause M" first="Merton S." last="Krause">Merton S. Krause</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Northwestern University</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Lutz, Wolfgang" sort="Lutz, Wolfgang" uniqKey="Lutz W" first="Wolfgang" last="Lutz">Wolfgang Lutz</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>University of Trier</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j">Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice</title><idno type="ISSN">0969-5893</idno><idno type="eISSN">1468-2850</idno><imprint><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Inc</publisher><pubPlace>Malden, USA</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2009-03">2009-03</date><biblScope unit="volume">16</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">1</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="73">73</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="81">81</biblScope></imprint><idno type="ISSN">0969-5893</idno></series><idno type="istex">79964AF79822E6E26E51D297DD80CFB8504E806D</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1111/j.1468-2850.2009.01146.x</idno><idno type="ArticleID">CPSP1146</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0969-5893</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>disaggregation</term><term>input types</term><term>nonrecursiveness</term><term>outcomes</term><term>process</term><term>therapist types</term><term>variance partitioning</term></keywords></textClass><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">The variance in outcomes for psychotherapy patients is not partitionable into components that are independent contributions of treatments, therapists, and patients. If these inputs did not influence one another over the course of psychotherapy, they could be independent and so have additive main‐effects or interaction‐effects on outcomes. But that is impossible because they do influence one another and therapists are responsible for actively managing the psychotherapy process by repeatedly adjusting these inputs toward optimally influencing one another. The consequent interdependence of these inputs within the therapy process needs to be reflected in the design and analysis of psychotherapy outcome studies, as it presently is not, if we are to learn who is adequate for treating whom, how, and why so.</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>wiley</corpusName><author><json:item><name>Merton S. Krause</name><affiliations><json:string>Northwestern University</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Wolfgang Lutz</name><affiliations><json:string>University of Trier</json:string></affiliations></json:item></author><subject><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>disaggregation</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>input types</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>nonrecursiveness</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>outcomes</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>process</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>therapist types</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>variance partitioning</value></json:item></subject><articleId><json:string>CPSP1146</json:string></articleId><language><json:string>eng</json:string></language><originalGenre><json:string>article</json:string></originalGenre><abstract>The variance in outcomes for psychotherapy patients is not partitionable into components that are independent contributions of treatments, therapists, and patients. If these inputs did not influence one another over the course of psychotherapy, they could be independent and so have additive main‐effects or interaction‐effects on outcomes. But that is impossible because they do influence one another and therapists are responsible for actively managing the psychotherapy process by repeatedly adjusting these inputs toward optimally influencing one another. The consequent interdependence of these inputs within the therapy process needs to be reflected in the design and analysis of psychotherapy outcome studies, as it presently is not, if we are to learn who is adequate for treating whom, how, and why so.</abstract><qualityIndicators><score>6.94</score><pdfVersion>1.4</pdfVersion><pdfPageSize>594.006 x 792.008 pts</pdfPageSize><refBibsNative>true</refBibsNative><abstractCharCount>811</abstractCharCount><pdfWordCount>6073</pdfWordCount><pdfCharCount>38727</pdfCharCount><pdfPageCount>9</pdfPageCount><abstractWordCount>120</abstractWordCount></qualityIndicators><title>Process Transforms Inputs to Determine Outcomes: Therapists Are Responsible for Managing Process</title><refBibs><json:item><host><author></author><title>Anderson, S., Auquier, A., Hauck, W. W., Oakes, D., Vandaele, W., & Weisberg, H. I. (1980). Statistical methods for comparative studies: Techniques for bias reduction. New York: Wiley.</title></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>M. J. Apter</name></json:item><json:item><name>K. Heskin</name></json:item></author><host><pages><last>96</last><first>77</first></pages><author></author><title>Motivational styles in everyday life: A guide to reversal theory</title></host><title>Basic research on reversal theory</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>S. A. Baldwin</name></json:item><json:item><name>B. E. Wampold</name></json:item><json:item><name>Z. E. Imel</name></json:item></author><host><volume>75</volume><pages><last>852</last><first>842</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology</title></host><title>Untangling the alliance‐outcome correlation: Exploring the relative importance of therapist and patient variability in the alliance</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Berry, W. D. (1984). Nonrecursive causal models. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.</title></host></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences(2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.</title></host></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Cox, D. R. (1958). Planning of experiments. New York: Wiley.</title></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>P. Crits‐Christoph</name></json:item><json:item><name>X. Tu</name></json:item><json:item><name>R. Gallop</name></json:item></author><host><volume>8</volume><pages><last>523</last><first>518</first></pages><author></author><title>Psychological Methods</title></host><title>Therapist as fixed versus random effects—some statistical and conceptual issues: A comment on Siemer & Joormann (2003)</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>J. R. Edwards</name></json:item><json:item><name>L. S. Lambert</name></json:item></author><host><volume>12</volume><pages><last>22</last><first>1</first></pages><author></author><title>Psychological Methods</title></host><title>Methods for integrating moderation and mediation: A general analytical framework using moderated path analysis</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>B. Ekehammar</name></json:item></author><host><volume>81</volume><pages><last>1048</last><first>1026</first></pages><author></author><title>Psychological Bulletin</title></host><title>Interactionism in personality from a historical perspective</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>I. Elkin</name></json:item></author><host><volume>6</volume><pages><last>32</last><first>10</first></pages><author></author><title>Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice</title></host><title>A major dilemma in psychotherapy outcome research: Disentangling therapists from therapies</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>I. Elkin</name></json:item><json:item><name>L. Falconnier</name></json:item><json:item><name>Z. Martinovich</name></json:item><json:item><name>C. Mahoney</name></json:item></author><host><volume>16</volume><pages><last>160</last><first>144</first></pages><author></author><title>Psychotherapy Research</title></host><title>Therapist effects in the National Institute of Mental Health Treatment of Depression Collaborative Research Program</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>W. Fleeson</name></json:item></author><host><volume>13</volume><pages><last>87</last><first>83</first></pages><author></author><title>Current Directions in Psychological Science</title></host><title>Moving personality beyond the person‐situation debate: The challenge and the opportunity of within‐person variability</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>K. I. Howard</name></json:item><json:item><name>M. S. Krause</name></json:item><json:item><name>S. M. Saunders</name></json:item><json:item><name>S. M. Kopta</name></json:item></author><host><volume>122</volume><pages><last>225</last><first>221</first></pages><author></author><title>Psychological Bulletin</title></host><title>Trials and tribulations in the meta‐analysis of treatment differences: Comment on Wampold et al. (1997)</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>K. I. Howard</name></json:item><json:item><name>M. S. Krause</name></json:item><json:item><name>J. Vessey</name></json:item></author><host><volume>31</volume><pages><last>307</last><first>302</first></pages><author></author><title>Psychotherapy</title></host><title>Analyzing clinical trial data: The problem of outcome overlap</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>L. M. Hsu</name></json:item></author><host><volume>57</volume><pages><last>137</last><first>131</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology</title></host><title>Random sampling, randomization, and equivalence of contrasted groups in psychotherapy outcome research</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>J. D. Huppert</name></json:item><json:item><name>L. F. Butka</name></json:item><json:item><name>D. H. Barlow</name></json:item><json:item><name>J. M. Gorman</name></json:item><json:item><name>M. K. Shear</name></json:item><json:item><name>S. W. Woods</name></json:item></author><host><volume>69</volume><pages><last>755</last><first>747</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology</title></host><title>Therapists, therapist variables, and cognitive behavioral therapy outcomes in a multicenter trial for panic disorder</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>E. E. Jones</name></json:item></author><host><pages><last>107</last><first>47</first></pages><author></author><title>The handbook of social psychology</title></host><title>Major developments in social psychology during the past five decades</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>P. C. Kendall</name></json:item><json:item><name>R. S. Beidas</name></json:item></author><host><volume>38</volume><pages><last>20</last><first>13</first></pages><author></author><title>Professional Psychology: Research and Practice</title></host><title>Smoothing the trail for dissemination of evidence‐based practices for youth: Flexibility within fidelity</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>D. Kim</name></json:item><json:item><name>B. E. Wampold</name></json:item><json:item><name>D. M. Bolt</name></json:item></author><host><volume>16</volume><pages><last>172</last><first>161</first></pages><author></author><title>Psychotherapy Research</title></host><title>Therapist effects in psychotherapy: A random effects modeling of the NIMH TDCRP data</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>B. Krahé</name></json:item></author><host><volume>20</volume><pages><last>361</last><first>349</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Research in Personality</title></host><title>Similar perceptions, similar reactions: An idiographic approach to cross‐situational coherence</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>M. S. Krause</name></json:item><json:item><name>K. I. Howard</name></json:item></author><host><volume>12</volume><pages><last>490</last><first>475</first></pages><author></author><title>Psychotherapy Research</title></host><title>The linear model is a very special case: How to explore data for their full clinical implications</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>M. S. Krause</name></json:item><json:item><name>K. I. Howard</name></json:item></author><host><volume>59</volume><pages><last>766</last><first>751</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Clinical Psychology</title></host><title>What random assignment does and does not do</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>M. S. Krause</name></json:item><json:item><name>W. Lutz</name></json:item></author><host><volume>43</volume><pages><last>361</last><first>359</first></pages><author></author><title>Psychotherapy</title></host><title>How we really ought to be comparing treatments for clinical purposes</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>M. S. Krause</name></json:item><json:item><name>W. Lutz</name></json:item><json:item><name>S. M. Saunders</name></json:item></author><host><volume>44</volume><pages><last>353</last><first>347</first></pages><author></author><title>Psychotherapy</title></host><title>Empirically certified treatments or therapists: The issue of separability</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>W. Lutz</name></json:item><json:item><name>S. C. Leon</name></json:item><json:item><name>Z. Martinovich</name></json:item><json:item><name>J. S. Lyons</name></json:item><json:item><name>W. B. Stiles</name></json:item></author><host><volume>54</volume><pages><last>39</last><first>32</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Counseling Psychology</title></host><title>Therapist effects in outpatient therapy: A three‐level growth curve approach</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>W. Lutz</name></json:item><json:item><name>Z. Martinovich</name></json:item><json:item><name>K. I. Howard</name></json:item><json:item><name>S. C. Leon</name></json:item></author><host><volume>58</volume><pages><last>1304</last><first>1291</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Clinical Psychology</title></host><title>Outcomes management, expected treatment response, and severity‐adjusted provider profiling in outpatient psychotherapy</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>W. Lutz</name></json:item><json:item><name>S. M. Saunders</name></json:item><json:item><name>S. C. Leon</name></json:item><json:item><name>Z. Martinovich</name></json:item><json:item><name>J. Kosfelder</name></json:item><json:item><name>D. Schulte</name></json:item></author><host><volume>18</volume><pages><last>141</last><first>133</first></pages><issue>2</issue><author></author><title>Psychological Assessment</title></host><title>Empirical and clinical useful decision making in psychotherapy: Differential predictions with treatment response models</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>D. Magnusson</name></json:item><json:item><name>B. Ekehammar</name></json:item></author><host><volume>12</volume><pages><last>48</last><first>41</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Research in Personality</title></host><title>Similar situations—similar behaviors? A study of the intraindividual congruence between situation perception and situation reactions</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>W. Mischel</name></json:item><json:item><name>Y. Shoda</name></json:item></author><host><volume>102</volume><pages><last>268</last><first>246</first></pages><author></author><title>Psychological Review</title></host><title>A cognitive‐affective system theory of personality: Reconceptualizing situations, dispositions, dynamics, and invariance in personality structure</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>T. C. Murtha</name></json:item><json:item><name>R. Kanfer</name></json:item><json:item><name>P. L. Ackerman</name></json:item></author><host><volume>71</volume><pages><last>207</last><first>193</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Personality and Social Psychology</title></host><title>Toward an interactionist taxonomy of personality and situations: An integrative situational‐dispositional representation of personality traits</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Orlinsky, D. E., & Rønnestad, M. H. (2005). How psychotherapists develop: A study of therapeutic work and professional growth. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.</title></host></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Rosenberger, W. F., & Lachin, J. M. (2002). Randomization in clinical trials: Theory and practice. New York: Wiley.</title></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>R. C. Serlin</name></json:item><json:item><name>B. E. Wampold</name></json:item><json:item><name>J. R. Levin</name></json:item></author><host><volume>8</volume><pages><last>534</last><first>524</first></pages><author></author><title>Psychological Methods</title></host><title>Should providers of treatment be regarded as a random factor? If it ain't broke, don't “fix” it: A comment on Siemer & Joormann (2003)</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>M. Siemer</name></json:item><json:item><name>J. Joormann</name></json:item></author><host><volume>8</volume><pages><last>517</last><first>497</first></pages><author></author><title>Psychological Methods</title></host><title>Power and measures of effect size in analysis of variance with fixed versus random nested factors</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>B. E. Wampold</name></json:item></author><host><pages><last>208</last><first>200</first></pages><author></author><title>Evidence‐based practices in mental health: Debate and dialogue on the fundamental questions</title></host><title>The psychotherapist</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>B. E. Wampold</name></json:item><json:item><name>G. S. Brown</name></json:item></author><host><volume>73</volume><pages><last>923</last><first>914</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology</title></host><title>Therapist variability in practice</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>B. E. Wampold</name></json:item><json:item><name>G. W. Mondin</name></json:item><json:item><name>M. Moody</name></json:item><json:item><name>F. Stich</name></json:item><json:item><name>K. Benson</name></json:item><json:item><name>H. Ahn</name></json:item></author><host><volume>122</volume><pages><last>215</last><first>203</first></pages><author></author><title>Psychological Bulletin</title></host><title>A meta‐analysis of outcome studies comparing bona fide psychotherapies: Empirically, “all must have prizes.”</title></json:item></refBibs><genre><json:string>article</json:string></genre><host><volume>16</volume><publisherId><json:string>CPSP</json:string></publisherId><pages><total>9</total><last>81</last><first>73</first></pages><issn><json:string>0969-5893</json:string></issn><issue>1</issue><genre><json:string>journal</json:string></genre><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><eissn><json:string>1468-2850</json:string></eissn><title>Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice</title><doi><json:string>10.1111/(ISSN)1468-2850</json:string></doi></host><categories><wos><json:string>social science</json:string><json:string>psychology, clinical</json:string></wos><scienceMetrix><json:string>health sciences</json:string><json:string>psychology & cognitive sciences</json:string><json:string>clinical psychology</json:string></scienceMetrix></categories><publicationDate>2009</publicationDate><copyrightDate>2009</copyrightDate><doi><json:string>10.1111/j.1468-2850.2009.01146.x</json:string></doi><id>79964AF79822E6E26E51D297DD80CFB8504E806D</id><score>1.8093265</score><fulltext><json:item><extension>pdf</extension><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/79964AF79822E6E26E51D297DD80CFB8504E806D/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><extension>zip</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/79964AF79822E6E26E51D297DD80CFB8504E806D/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/79964AF79822E6E26E51D297DD80CFB8504E806D/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Process Transforms Inputs to Determine Outcomes: Therapists Are Responsible for Managing Process</title></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Inc</publisher><pubPlace>Malden, USA</pubPlace><availability><p>© 2009 American Psychological Association</p></availability><date>2009</date></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="inbook"><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Process Transforms Inputs to Determine Outcomes: Therapists Are Responsible for Managing Process</title><author xml:id="author-1"><persName><forename type="first">Merton S.</forename><surname>Krause</surname></persName><affiliation>Northwestern University</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-2"><persName><forename type="first">Wolfgang</forename><surname>Lutz</surname></persName><affiliation>University of Trier</affiliation></author></analytic><monogr><title level="j">Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice</title><idno type="pISSN">0969-5893</idno><idno type="eISSN">1468-2850</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1468-2850</idno><imprint><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Inc</publisher><pubPlace>Malden, USA</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2009-03"></date><biblScope unit="volume">16</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">1</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="73">73</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="81">81</biblScope></imprint></monogr><idno type="istex">79964AF79822E6E26E51D297DD80CFB8504E806D</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1111/j.1468-2850.2009.01146.x</idno><idno type="ArticleID">CPSP1146</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><creation><date>2009</date></creation><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage><abstract xml:lang="en"><p>The variance in outcomes for psychotherapy patients is not partitionable into components that are independent contributions of treatments, therapists, and patients. If these inputs did not influence one another over the course of psychotherapy, they could be independent and so have additive main‐effects or interaction‐effects on outcomes. But that is impossible because they do influence one another and therapists are responsible for actively managing the psychotherapy process by repeatedly adjusting these inputs toward optimally influencing one another. The consequent interdependence of these inputs within the therapy process needs to be reflected in the design and analysis of psychotherapy outcome studies, as it presently is not, if we are to learn who is adequate for treating whom, how, and why so.</p></abstract><textClass xml:lang="en"><keywords scheme="keyword"><list><head>keywords</head><item><term>disaggregation</term></item><item><term>input types</term></item><item><term>nonrecursiveness</term></item><item><term>outcomes</term></item><item><term>process</term></item><item><term>therapist types</term></item><item><term>variance partitioning</term></item></list></keywords></textClass></profileDesc><revisionDesc><change when="2009-03">Published</change></revisionDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI><json:item><extension>txt</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/79964AF79822E6E26E51D297DD80CFB8504E806D/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="Wiley, elements deleted: body"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"</istex:xmlDeclaration><istex:document><component version="2.0" type="serialArticle" xml:lang="en"><header><publicationMeta level="product"><publisherInfo><publisherName>Blackwell Publishing Inc</publisherName><publisherLoc>Malden, USA</publisherLoc></publisherInfo><doi origin="wiley" registered="yes">10.1111/(ISSN)1468-2850</doi><issn type="print">0969-5893</issn><issn type="electronic">1468-2850</issn><idGroup><id type="product" value="CPSP"></id><id type="publisherDivision" value="ST"></id></idGroup><titleGroup><title type="main" sort="CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY SCIENCE PRACTICE">Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice</title></titleGroup></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="part" position="03001"><doi origin="wiley">10.1111/cpsp.2009.16.issue-1</doi><numberingGroup><numbering type="journalVolume" number="16">16</numbering><numbering type="journalIssue" number="1">1</numbering></numberingGroup><coverDate startDate="2009-03">March 2009</coverDate></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="unit" type="article" position="10" status="forIssue"><doi origin="wiley">10.1111/j.1468-2850.2009.01146.x</doi><idGroup><id type="unit" value="CPSP1146"></id></idGroup><countGroup><count type="pageTotal" number="9"></count></countGroup><titleGroup><title type="tocHeading1">REVIEW AND COMMENTARIES</title></titleGroup><copyright>© 2009 American Psychological Association</copyright><eventGroup><event type="firstOnline" date="2009-02-17"></event><event type="publishedOnlineFinalForm" date="2009-02-17"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:BPG_TO_WML3G version:2.3.2 mode:FullText source:FullText result:FullText" date="2010-03-16"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WILEY_ML3G_TO_WILEY_ML3GV2 version:3.8.8" date="2014-01-16"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WML3G_To_WML3G version:4.1.7 mode:FullText,remove_FC" date="2014-10-17"></event></eventGroup><numberingGroup><numbering type="pageFirst" number="73">73</numbering><numbering type="pageLast" number="81">81</numbering></numberingGroup><correspondenceTo>Address correspondence to Merton S. Krause, Department of Psychology, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL 60208. E‐mail: <email>msk514@msn.com</email>.</correspondenceTo><linkGroup><link type="toTypesetVersion" href="file:CPSP.CPSP1146.pdf"></link></linkGroup></publicationMeta><contentMeta><unparsedEditorialHistory>Received October 6, 2007; revised May 6, 2008; accepted May 12, 2008.</unparsedEditorialHistory><countGroup><count type="figureTotal" number="0"></count><count type="tableTotal" number="0"></count><count type="formulaTotal" number="0"></count><count type="referenceTotal" number="38"></count><count type="wordTotal" number="6902"></count></countGroup><titleGroup><title type="main">Process Transforms Inputs to Determine Outcomes: Therapists Are Responsible for Managing Process</title></titleGroup><creators><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr1" affiliationRef="#a1"><personName><givenNames>Merton S.</givenNames><familyName>Krause</familyName></personName></creator><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr2" affiliationRef="#a2"><personName><givenNames>Wolfgang</givenNames><familyName>Lutz</familyName></personName></creator></creators><affiliationGroup><affiliation xml:id="a1"><unparsedAffiliation>Northwestern University</unparsedAffiliation></affiliation><affiliation xml:id="a2"><unparsedAffiliation>University of Trier</unparsedAffiliation></affiliation></affiliationGroup><keywordGroup xml:lang="en"><keyword xml:id="k1">disaggregation</keyword><keyword xml:id="k2">input types</keyword><keyword xml:id="k3">nonrecursiveness</keyword><keyword xml:id="k4">outcomes</keyword><keyword xml:id="k5">process</keyword><keyword xml:id="k6">therapist types</keyword><keyword xml:id="k7">variance partitioning</keyword></keywordGroup><abstractGroup><abstract type="main" xml:lang="en"><p>The variance in outcomes for psychotherapy patients is not partitionable into components that are independent contributions of treatments, therapists, and patients. If these inputs did not influence one another over the course of psychotherapy, they could be independent and so have additive main‐effects or interaction‐effects on outcomes. But that is impossible because they do influence one another and therapists are responsible for actively managing the psychotherapy process by repeatedly adjusting these inputs toward optimally influencing one another. The consequent interdependence of these inputs within the therapy process needs to be reflected in the design and analysis of psychotherapy outcome studies, as it presently is not, if we are to learn who is adequate for treating whom, how, and why so.</p><!-- [Clin Psychol Sci Prac 16: 73–81, 2009] --></abstract></abstractGroup></contentMeta></header></component></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><mods version="3.6"><titleInfo lang="en"><title>Process Transforms Inputs to Determine Outcomes: Therapists Are Responsible for Managing Process</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative" contentType="CDATA" lang="en"><title>Process Transforms Inputs to Determine Outcomes: Therapists Are Responsible for Managing Process</title></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Merton S.</namePart><namePart type="family">Krause</namePart><affiliation>Northwestern University</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Wolfgang</namePart><namePart type="family">Lutz</namePart><affiliation>University of Trier</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource><genre type="article" displayLabel="article"></genre><originInfo><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Inc</publisher><place><placeTerm type="text">Malden, USA</placeTerm></place><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">2009-03</dateIssued><edition>Received October 6, 2007; revised May 6, 2008; accepted May 12, 2008.</edition><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">2009</copyrightDate></originInfo><language><languageTerm type="code" authority="rfc3066">en</languageTerm><languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm></language><physicalDescription><internetMediaType>text/html</internetMediaType><extent unit="references">38</extent><extent unit="words">6902</extent></physicalDescription><abstract lang="en">The variance in outcomes for psychotherapy patients is not partitionable into components that are independent contributions of treatments, therapists, and patients. If these inputs did not influence one another over the course of psychotherapy, they could be independent and so have additive main‐effects or interaction‐effects on outcomes. But that is impossible because they do influence one another and therapists are responsible for actively managing the psychotherapy process by repeatedly adjusting these inputs toward optimally influencing one another. The consequent interdependence of these inputs within the therapy process needs to be reflected in the design and analysis of psychotherapy outcome studies, as it presently is not, if we are to learn who is adequate for treating whom, how, and why so.</abstract><subject lang="en"><genre>keywords</genre><topic>disaggregation</topic><topic>input types</topic><topic>nonrecursiveness</topic><topic>outcomes</topic><topic>process</topic><topic>therapist types</topic><topic>variance partitioning</topic></subject><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice</title></titleInfo><genre type="journal">journal</genre><identifier type="ISSN">0969-5893</identifier><identifier type="eISSN">1468-2850</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1468-2850</identifier><identifier type="PublisherID">CPSP</identifier><part><date>2009</date><detail type="volume"><caption>vol.</caption><number>16</number></detail><detail type="issue"><caption>no.</caption><number>1</number></detail><extent unit="pages"><start>73</start><end>81</end><total>9</total></extent></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">79964AF79822E6E26E51D297DD80CFB8504E806D</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1111/j.1468-2850.2009.01146.x</identifier><identifier type="ArticleID">CPSP1146</identifier><accessCondition type="use and reproduction" contentType="copyright">© 2009 American Psychological Association</accessCondition><recordInfo><recordContentSource>WILEY</recordContentSource><recordOrigin>Blackwell Publishing Inc</recordOrigin></recordInfo></mods></metadata><serie></serie></istex></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Rhénanie/explor/UnivTrevesV1/Data/Istex/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 001558 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 001558 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Rhénanie
|area= UnivTrevesV1
|flux= Istex
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:79964AF79822E6E26E51D297DD80CFB8504E806D
|texte= Process Transforms Inputs to Determine Outcomes: Therapists Are Responsible for Managing Process
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.31. |  |