Existential Isolation as a Correlate of Mental Health Problems, Predictor of Treatment Outcome, and Moderator of a Patient-Therapist Match Effect

IF 1 4区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology Pub Date : 2023-02-01 DOI:10.1521/jscp.2023.42.1.1
Michael J. Constantino, Averi N. Gaines, A. Coyne, James F. Boswell, D. Kraus
{"title":"Existential Isolation as a Correlate of Mental Health Problems, Predictor of Treatment Outcome, and Moderator of a Patient-Therapist Match Effect","authors":"Michael J. Constantino, Averi N. Gaines, A. Coyne, James F. Boswell, D. Kraus","doi":"10.1521/jscp.2023.42.1.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Ample research has established that interpersonal isolation—the objective separateness from others—is a correlate of maladaptive psychological outcomes. However, existential isolation (EI)—the feeling of aloneness in one's subjective experience—has received less empirical attention. From the limited existing research, higher EI has been associated with greater severity of mental health concerns and more negative beliefs about treatment. Yet, these investigations have largely been conducted with non-clinical samples. Further, virtually no studies have examined EI as a predictor of current psychotherapy outcomes. Moreover, given their risk of holding negative treatment beliefs, it is plausible that therapy would be most effective if more existentially isolated individuals experienced being well matched to their therapist. This study extended EI research to a clinical sample and provided a novel test of EI as a direct predictor of outcome and moderator of a patient-therapist match system in naturalistic psychotherapy. Method: Data derived from a randomized trial comparing the effectiveness of prospectively matching patients (N = 218) to therapists (N = 48) with empirical strengths in treating the patient's specific presenting problem(s) versus case assignment as usual (Constantino et al., 2021). Patients rated EI at baseline and mental health outcomes repeatedly through treatment. We conducted correlations to examine baseline EI-symptom associations and multilevel modeling to test EI as a predictor of symptom change and moderator of the known beneficial match effect on outcome. Results: As predicted, higher EI was associated with greater depression, anxiety, and distress at baseline, as well as poorer therapy outcome across and at the end of treatment. In the expected direction, though not to a statistically significant level, the positive match effect was stronger for patients with higher versus lower EI. Discussion: We discuss research and practice implications at the intersection of social and clinical psychology.","PeriodicalId":48202,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2023.42.1.1","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Ample research has established that interpersonal isolation—the objective separateness from others—is a correlate of maladaptive psychological outcomes. However, existential isolation (EI)—the feeling of aloneness in one's subjective experience—has received less empirical attention. From the limited existing research, higher EI has been associated with greater severity of mental health concerns and more negative beliefs about treatment. Yet, these investigations have largely been conducted with non-clinical samples. Further, virtually no studies have examined EI as a predictor of current psychotherapy outcomes. Moreover, given their risk of holding negative treatment beliefs, it is plausible that therapy would be most effective if more existentially isolated individuals experienced being well matched to their therapist. This study extended EI research to a clinical sample and provided a novel test of EI as a direct predictor of outcome and moderator of a patient-therapist match system in naturalistic psychotherapy. Method: Data derived from a randomized trial comparing the effectiveness of prospectively matching patients (N = 218) to therapists (N = 48) with empirical strengths in treating the patient's specific presenting problem(s) versus case assignment as usual (Constantino et al., 2021). Patients rated EI at baseline and mental health outcomes repeatedly through treatment. We conducted correlations to examine baseline EI-symptom associations and multilevel modeling to test EI as a predictor of symptom change and moderator of the known beneficial match effect on outcome. Results: As predicted, higher EI was associated with greater depression, anxiety, and distress at baseline, as well as poorer therapy outcome across and at the end of treatment. In the expected direction, though not to a statistically significant level, the positive match effect was stronger for patients with higher versus lower EI. Discussion: We discuss research and practice implications at the intersection of social and clinical psychology.
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
存在隔离作为心理健康问题的相关性、治疗结果的预测因素和患者-治疗师匹配效应的调节因素
大量研究表明,人际隔离——与他人客观分离——与适应不良的心理结果相关。然而,存在主义孤立(EI)——一个人主观体验中的孤独感——很少受到实证的关注。从有限的现有研究来看,高情商与更严重的心理健康问题和对治疗的更消极的信念有关。然而,这些调查主要是在非临床样本中进行的。此外,几乎没有研究将情商作为当前心理治疗结果的预测指标。此外,考虑到他们持有消极治疗信念的风险,如果更多存在孤立的个体体验到与他们的治疗师很好地匹配,治疗将是最有效的,这是合理的。本研究将情商研究扩展到临床样本,并提供了一种新的测试,即情商作为自然主义心理治疗中患者-治疗师匹配系统的直接预测结果和调节因素。方法:数据来源于一项随机试验,比较前瞻性匹配患者(N = 218)与治疗师(N = 48)在治疗患者特定表现问题方面的经验优势与常规病例分配的有效性(Constantino等人,2021)。患者在治疗过程中反复评估基线EI和心理健康结果。我们进行了相关研究,以检验基线EI与症状之间的关联,并进行了多层次建模,以检验EI作为症状变化的预测因子和已知的有益匹配效应对结果的调节作用。结果:正如预测的那样,高EI在基线时与更大的抑郁、焦虑和痛苦相关,以及治疗期间和治疗结束时较差的治疗结果。在预期的方向上,虽然没有达到统计学显著水平,但高EI患者的正匹配效应比低EI患者更强。讨论:我们讨论社会心理学和临床心理学交叉的研究和实践意义。
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
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: This journal is devoted to the application of theory and research from social psychology toward the better understanding of human adaptation and adjustment, including both the alleviation of psychological problems and distress (e.g., psychopathology) and the enhancement of psychological well-being among the psychologically healthy. Topics of interest include (but are not limited to) traditionally defined psychopathology (e.g., depression), common emotional and behavioral problems in living (e.g., conflicts in close relationships), the enhancement of subjective well-being, and the processes of psychological change in everyday life (e.g., self-regulation) and professional settings (e.g., psychotherapy and counseling). Articles reporting the results of theory-driven empirical research are given priority, but theoretical articles, review articles, clinical case studies, and essays on professional issues are also welcome. Articles describing the development of new scales (personality or otherwise) or the revision of existing scales are not appropriate for this journal.
期刊最新文献
A Person × Environment approach to Borderline Personality Disorder features in young people: The role of life events, parental support, and self-esteem Filial piety as a beneficial factor for posttraumatic adjustment in the context of adverse childhood experiences among Taiwanese young adults Characterizing the mental health concerns of significant others of those with Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) and how BPD impacts them Conveying depression: Is a reduced relative preference for happiness a way depressed people convince themselves of their depressed identity? Gender differences in college drinkers: A test of the precarious manhood hypothesis on drinking motivation
×
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