This Article Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 0022167807302003v1 47/4/474    most recent References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Elkins, D. N. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Empirically Supported Treatments: the Deconstruction of a Myth

Pepperdine University, Graduate School of Education and Psychology, 6100 Center Dr., Los Angeles, CA 90045, davidnelkins@ hotmail.com

This article summarizes recent findings from analyses and meta-analyses of psychotherapy research that show that so-called empirically supported treatments (ESTs) are no more effective than are traditional psychotherapies. In addition, the findings show that specific modalities and techniques have little, if anything at all, to do with therapeutic benefits and that client improvement and therapeutic outcome are instead the result of other factors in the therapeutic situation such as the alliance, the therapist, the relationship, and other contextual factors. The article shows how these findings deconstruct the whole notion of ESTs and make the current debate about them meaningless. Finally, the article discusses implications of the findings and urges humanistic psychologists and other proponents of traditional psychotherapies to shift the debate away from modalities and techniques and to focus on the factors that are actually responsible for therapeutic benefits.

Key Words: psychotherapy • treatment • empirical • evidence • contextual

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?