Effectiveness of Psychotherapy, Reaction Paper Example

In determining whether psychotherapy works, we should start with a specialized term: “meta-analysis” (Abbass, 2009). Imagine there are 25 published investigations of psychotherapy as a treatment for depression, directed by numerous specialists in distinctive areas. The studies, obviously, will contrast from one another in a few ways: the different measures of depression that were utilized, to what extent medication lasted, what training the specialists had, etc. Regardless, the greater parts of the studies have a shared trait: they all measure manifestations of depression prior to and after psychotherapy (Abbass, 2006). A meta-analysis might accumulate each of the 25 studies together, consolidate them into a single database, and afterward compute an average overall impact of psychotherapy on depression.

To figure this average effect, specialists utilize a measurable instrument outlined only for this purpose. It is called Effect Size, and it is utilized broadly within investigations of both therapeutic and psychological treatment (Lipsey, 1993). To show how this instrument is utilized, we should go back to the meta-analysis of 25 published investigations of depression. Assume the greater part of the studies measured indications of depression in two groups of individuals – the individuals who did not get medicine whatsoever, and the individuals who did get medication for depression. Scientists attempt to make these two gatherings equivalent all around (age, sexual orientation, seriousness of side effects, and so on.), with the exception of one group that is treated while the other group is not. The specialists then compute the average score on all measures of gloom for the “no treatment” groups. That score will ultimately be 50th percentile on the bell curve. The specialists will then compute the normal depression levels for the treatment groups, too.

As an example how huge these progressions are, take note of the Effect Sizes for a couple of anti-depressant medications, as arranged by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration: Prozac: 0.26, Celexa: .24, and Lexapro: .31 (Turner, 2008). The normal Effect Size for all depressant prescriptions was .31. These are significantly smaller impacts than those accomplished by psychotherapy, yet they are still extremely significant. The best recuperation rates for depression, coincidentally, utilize both psychotherapy and medicine. Although the process is arduous and complicated, data such as the one presented in this paper show that psychotherapy truly does work and is an effective tool.

Additional research that is a bit easier to interpret indicates that the fundamental component at play is what’s known as a therapist-client companionship (Wampold, 2013). Basically, the degree to which one is comfortable, at ease, and connected with his or her specialist equates to how successful the treatment will be. In the event that one would go to treatment and simply cannot become close with the therapist (for instance he or she does not talk enough or too much or does not connect with the client) then the psychotherapy may suffer. Anyhow, most individuals do not generally think about a close relationship when picking an therapist. Rather, experience level, sexual orientation, age, and theoretical orientation are considered. What is not realized is that all these components matter just to the degree that it helps the client connect with the therapist.

As such, empirical evidence breaks down how psychotherapy works. Through intricate and advanced algorithm previously mentioned, researches have been able to show the effectiveness of psychotherapy and its advantages. The research done by Wampold shows why psychotherapy works the way it does on a personal level. With this, it becomes clearer to see and understand the effectiveness of psychotherapy.

References

Abbass, A. A., Hancock, J. T., Henderson, J., & Kisely, S. (2006). Short-term psychodynamic psychotherapies for common mental disorders. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Issue 4, Article No. CD004687.

Abbass, A., Kisely, S., & Kroenke, K. (2009). Short-term psychodynamic psychotherapy for somatic disorders: Systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 78, 265–274.

Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (1993). The efficacy of psychological, educational, and behavioral treatment: Confirmation from meta-analysis. American Psychologist, 48, 1181–1209.

Turner, E. H., Matthews, A. M., Linardatos, E., Tell, R. A., & Rosenthal, R. (2008). Selective publication of antidepressant trials and its influence on apparent efficacy. New England Journal of Medicine, 358, 252–260.

Wampold, Bruce E. The great psychotherapy debate: Models, methods, and findings. Vol. 9. Routledge, 2013.