psychotherapy Flashcards
(25 cards)
How different are therapies
-Animal, creative, family
- All assume people repress feelings they’re uncomfortable with, where they remain in unconscious without appropriate therapy
-All derived from Freud
Freud’s childhood family
- His son rejected him as a role model
- was an standing student + studied hard
- family life revolved around his studies
-Freud’s mother referred to him as My Golder sign the seemed to be the favourite
origins-Joseph Breuer
*Berger->Breuer was well respected
-inventor of-psychoanalysis
origins- Bertha Pappenheim
- strange ben: partial paralysis of legs, arms + neck
-Brewer fund no physical explanation - worked on cathartic method
-recovered unconscious memories , put experiences, thoughts + emotions into words
British Psychoanalytical Soc
-society was split into 3 parts
1) Freudian
2) Kleinian
3) independent
unconscious rationalisations -Wilson + Nisbett study
- Wilson + Nisbett- ppts read about a study where they give out electric shocks
-ppts asked now much shock rrey’d undergo
-experimental group reassured they won’t do any perm damage
-Asked whether reassurance would’ve affected their willingness to shock - 2 groups didn’t differ in shock level they said they’d endure
-experimental thought reassurance increased their willingness
Halo Effect- study
-Nisbett + Wilson (1977)
-different ppts watched video of same teacher with either warm or cold teaching style
-ppts eval of teachers mannerisms were influenced by their beh
-Their liking for the teacher was manipulated+ this affected their ratings of attributes
Defence Mechanism-Repression
-freed focuses on bm for aversive thoughts + feelings
-Turning something away + keeping it at distance from conscious
-keeping unacceptable impuises from conscious
Defence mechanism - Repression-Anderson + Green
-Think/no think procedure
-ppts trained with word pairs
present 1 word from each pair asked to say its pair or suppress all conscious memory of it
Defence mechanism - Repression- interpretation issue
-Anderson + Green
- It states suppression isn’t a result of divisionary thought or weakening of cue-target association
-gave an independent cue that relates to target but no association + still struggle to remember but the training directly inhibits the target
Defence mechanism - Repression- Associative inference Test
-Anderson + Green recall suppression of target processes with training perfectly well even when using an indep cue to test recall
- result was that the independent cue supressed recalled increased
Defence mechanism - Repression- witholding recalled response
-Anderson + Green- perhaps ppts became confused + didn’t want to say it if they weren’t sure?
-ppts told to guess + money for getting it right
- cue result still essentially intact
-suppression recalled increased
Defence mechanism - Repression- consciousness regulation
- the reg of consciousness is accomplished by an inhib control suppressing unwanted memory + not by the memory filing of WM with diversionary thoughts
Lambert et al (2010) + repression
- If think/no think suppression + Freudian repression arise from common mechanism, expect to observe suppression in response to emotional neg not pos material
-suppression to reg words seen in trained/independent condition
-suppression didn’t occur with pas words
Repression -Neurological Basis
-Anderson et al (2004)
-Think/ no think during suppression found increased activity in dorsolateral PFC + decreased in hippocampus
-suggests cortex suppressing hippocampal memory function
Dorsolateral PFC + repression - Inhibitory control
-Apsvalka et Al (2022) proposed lateral Pfc exerted inhib control over motor circuit via M1 + also recall of emotional aversive memories via hippocampus
-ppts learn stop-signal + think /no-think task
-ppts inhib performance on stop-signal motor task correlated with think/no-think suggesting common neural mechanisms at work
careers - BACP: Recommended Training
-3 stages
1) Intro to counselling -taster courses
2) certificate in counselling skills - 1 year part time
3) core practitioner training -core knowledge, 1 year full time
Efficacy of psychodynamic psychotherapy
-patients maintain therapeutic gains + improve after treatment
-Belief some concepts + treatment lack support
-potential bias s eager about evidence supporting non-psychotherapy+ psychotherapy is overlooked
Distinctive features of psychodynamic techniques
-1 or 2 times a week
-explore unknown aspects of self
-focus on affect + expression of emotion
-exploration of attempts to avoid distressing thoughts
-identifying recurring themes + patterns
-discuss past experience
-focus on interpersonal relations
-focus on therapy relationship
- exploration of fantasy life
smith, Glass + miller-effectiveness of psychotherapy
-479 studies + yielded overall effect size of 0.85 compared with untreated controls
Lipset + wilson-meta-analysis of effectiveness
18 meta-anacyses had median effect size of 0.75
Abbas, Hancok, Henderson + Kisely, 2006 -effect of psychodynamic therapy
-23 RCT
-studies compare a range of MHI
-overall effect size of 0.97
-1.51 effect after follow-up
Bateman + fonagy- follow-up of psychodynamic therapy
-5 year follow-up
-87% who received other treatment met criteria for borderline personality disorder
-13% who received therapy
psychodynamic process in other therapies
-even in controlled studies, therapists interact with patients differently + implement interventions differently (Elkin et Al)
-Q-sort process (Jones)
constructed 2 prototypes of therapy
1) psychodynamic = unstructured, open-ended recurring theme identification
2) CBT prototype = emphasised dialogue, structured
