Showing papers by "Allen E. Bergin published in 1971"

Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change: An empirical analysis

Abstract: An empirical approach to the classification of disturbed children. Journal of Clinical A new direction for education: Behavior analysis (Vol. 2). Lawrence A. E. Bergin & S. L. Garfield (Eds.), Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change:. This is in contrast to the view that the effectiveness of psychotherapy and counseling to edit many editions of the Handbook of Psychotherapy and Behavior Change with a literature review of empirical studies of psychotherapy outcomes in 1975, the Their multidimensional scaling analysis represented the results.

Therapeutic conditions and outcome.

Abstract: .Furthermore, while accurate empathy and warmth were significantly correlated in a positive direction, bpJjLJKexej^ajiyety_cjyxe]ated-^v4ih^gejiuineness. The three therapeutic conditions also were not significantly correlate] with measures of the therapists' personal characteristics secured from the Edwards Personal Preference Scale. The findings are discussed and questions arc raised concerning the meaningfulness and generality of the three therapeutic conditions.

Evaluating outcome in psychotherapy : a hardy perennial

Abstract: As is evident by the thoughtful comments of Fiske (1971) and Luborsky (1971) on our paper (Garfield, Prager, & Bergin, 1971), research on outcome in psychotherapy is a difficult, complicated, and often perplexing undertaking, with a number of pitfalls for the prospective investigator. We encountered some; in some cases we were aware of the problems, but in others we were not. In some instances we had additional data and analyses available, but in terms of preparing a succinct report, did not include them in this particular publication. Furthermore, it should be pointed out that the report on outcome is just one report of a larger study of psychotherapy, and other related aspects have been reported in two other publications (Garfield & Bergin, 1971; Prager & Garfield, in press) as well as in the dissertation of Prager (1970). Consequently, some data were emphasized in some reports and not in others. In terms of the space allotted for our comments, it is not possible to discuss fully all the issues raised by the two discussants. Consequently, we will limit our reply to attempts at clarification of some of the points made, at provision of additional information, and at discussion of more general issues which we regard as particularly salient. We would agree with the criticisms made concerning the use of raw change or difference scores and our study would have been improved by statistically accounting for the initial or pretherapy level of disturbance. However, as reported elsewhere (Prager, 1970; Prager & Garfield, in press), there was virtually no relation1 Requests for reprints should be sent to Sol L.