The role of mentalizing in psychological interventions in adults: Systematic review and recommendations for future research

IF 13.7 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Clinical Psychology Review Pub Date : 2024-01-08 DOI:10.1016/j.cpr.2024.102380
Patrick Luyten , Chloe Campbell , Max Moser , Peter Fonagy
{"title":"The role of mentalizing in psychological interventions in adults: Systematic review and recommendations for future research","authors":"Patrick Luyten ,&nbsp;Chloe Campbell ,&nbsp;Max Moser ,&nbsp;Peter Fonagy","doi":"10.1016/j.cpr.2024.102380","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><span>Mentalizing is the human capacity to understand actions of others and one's own behavior in terms of intentional mental states, such as feelings, wishes, goals and desires. Mentalizing is a transtheoretical and transdiagnostic concept that has been applied to understanding vulnerability to psychopathology and has attracted considerable research attention over the past decades. This paper reports on a pre-registered systematic review<span> of evidence concerning the role of mentalizing as a moderator and mediator in psychological interventions in adults. Studies in adults were reviewed that address the following questions: (a) does pre-treatment mentalizing predict treatment outcome; (b) do changes in mentalizing across treatment predict outcome; (c) does adherence to the principles or protocol of mentalization-based treatment predict outcome; and (d) does strengthening in-session mentalizing impact the therapeutic process via improved alliance, alleviated symptoms, or improved interpersonal functioning? Results suggest that mentalizing might be a mediator of change in psychotherapy and may moderate treatment outcome. However, the relatively small number of studies (</span></span><em>n</em> = 33 papers based on 29 studies, totaling 3124 participants) that could be included in this review, and the heterogeneity of studies in terms of design, measures used, disorders included, and treatment modalities, precluded a formal meta-analysis and limited the ability to draw strong conclusions. Therefore, theoretical and methodological recommendations for future research to improve the quality of existing research in this area are formulated.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48458,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Psychology Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":13.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272735824000011","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Mentalizing is the human capacity to understand actions of others and one's own behavior in terms of intentional mental states, such as feelings, wishes, goals and desires. Mentalizing is a transtheoretical and transdiagnostic concept that has been applied to understanding vulnerability to psychopathology and has attracted considerable research attention over the past decades. This paper reports on a pre-registered systematic review of evidence concerning the role of mentalizing as a moderator and mediator in psychological interventions in adults. Studies in adults were reviewed that address the following questions: (a) does pre-treatment mentalizing predict treatment outcome; (b) do changes in mentalizing across treatment predict outcome; (c) does adherence to the principles or protocol of mentalization-based treatment predict outcome; and (d) does strengthening in-session mentalizing impact the therapeutic process via improved alliance, alleviated symptoms, or improved interpersonal functioning? Results suggest that mentalizing might be a mediator of change in psychotherapy and may moderate treatment outcome. However, the relatively small number of studies (n = 33 papers based on 29 studies, totaling 3124 participants) that could be included in this review, and the heterogeneity of studies in terms of design, measures used, disorders included, and treatment modalities, precluded a formal meta-analysis and limited the ability to draw strong conclusions. Therefore, theoretical and methodological recommendations for future research to improve the quality of existing research in this area are formulated.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
心理化在成人心理干预中的作用:系统回顾与未来研究建议
心智化是指人类从情感、愿望、目标和欲望等有意心理状态来理解他人行为和自身行为的能力。心智化是一个跨理论和跨诊断的概念,已被应用于理解心理病理学的脆弱性,并在过去几十年中吸引了相当多的研究关注。本文报告了一项预先登记的系统性综述,综述了有关心理化在成人心理干预中的调节和中介作用的证据。本文综述了针对以下问题的成人研究:(a) 治疗前的心理化是否能预测治疗结果;(b) 心理化在整个治疗过程中的变化是否能预测治疗结果;(c) 坚持以心理化为基础的治疗原则或方案是否能预测治疗结果;(d) 加强治疗过程中的心理化是否能通过改善联盟、减轻症状或改善人际功能来影响治疗过程?研究结果表明,心理化可能是心理治疗变化的中介因素,并可能调节治疗结果。然而,由于可纳入本综述的研究数量相对较少(n = 33 篇论文,基于 29 项研究,共有 3124 名参与者),而且这些研究在设计、使用的测量方法、纳入的疾病和治疗模式方面存在异质性,因此无法进行正式的荟萃分析,也限制了得出有力结论的能力。因此,我们为今后的研究提出了理论和方法上的建议,以提高该领域现有研究的质量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical Psychology Review
Clinical Psychology Review PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
23.10
自引率
1.60%
发文量
65
期刊介绍: Clinical Psychology Review serves as a platform for substantial reviews addressing pertinent topics in clinical psychology. Encompassing a spectrum of issues, from psychopathology to behavior therapy, cognition to cognitive therapies, behavioral medicine to community mental health, assessment, and child development, the journal seeks cutting-edge papers that significantly contribute to advancing the science and/or practice of clinical psychology. While maintaining a primary focus on topics directly related to clinical psychology, the journal occasionally features reviews on psychophysiology, learning therapy, experimental psychopathology, and social psychology, provided they demonstrate a clear connection to research or practice in clinical psychology. Integrative literature reviews and summaries of innovative ongoing clinical research programs find a place within its pages. However, reports on individual research studies and theoretical treatises or clinical guides lacking an empirical base are deemed inappropriate for publication.
期刊最新文献
Factors related to help-seeking and service utilization for professional mental healthcare among young people: An umbrella review Positive health outcomes of mindfulness-based interventions for cancer patients and survivors: A systematic review and meta-analysis Sleep and paranoia: A systematic review and meta-analysis Avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder: Systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrating the impact of study quality on prevalence rates Gender nonconformity and common mental health problems: A meta-analysis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1