在扩大心理治疗范围中与两极分化作斗争。

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q3 PSYCHIATRY Journal of Psychiatric Practice Pub Date : 2023-09-01 DOI:10.1097/PRA.0000000000000739
Jon G Allen
{"title":"在扩大心理治疗范围中与两极分化作斗争。","authors":"Jon G Allen","doi":"10.1097/PRA.0000000000000739","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The author queried 32 colleagues about their sense of polarization in the field of psychotherapy, using as an example the contrast between generalists (like himself) and specialists. This query was inspired by the proliferation of brands of psychotherapy coupled with the dominance of cognitive-behavioral therapies. His key conclusions: (a) tensions in the field are associated with a multitude of polarities and individual differences; (b) it is folly to reduce polarization to any single polarity; and (c) given the field's huge diversity, we are all specialists. While the author advocates greater integration of theories and methods, he also argues for expansion by including ethical thought into the scientific zeitgeist. He proposes skill in being human as a broad aspiration for therapists and patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":16909,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Psychiatric Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Contending With Polarization in the Expanding Scope of Psychotherapy.\",\"authors\":\"Jon G Allen\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/PRA.0000000000000739\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The author queried 32 colleagues about their sense of polarization in the field of psychotherapy, using as an example the contrast between generalists (like himself) and specialists. This query was inspired by the proliferation of brands of psychotherapy coupled with the dominance of cognitive-behavioral therapies. His key conclusions: (a) tensions in the field are associated with a multitude of polarities and individual differences; (b) it is folly to reduce polarization to any single polarity; and (c) given the field's huge diversity, we are all specialists. While the author advocates greater integration of theories and methods, he also argues for expansion by including ethical thought into the scientific zeitgeist. He proposes skill in being human as a broad aspiration for therapists and patients.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16909,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Psychiatric Practice\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Psychiatric Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/PRA.0000000000000739\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Psychiatric Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/PRA.0000000000000739","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

作者询问了32位同事在心理治疗领域的两极分化感,并以多面手(像他自己)和专家之间的对比为例。这一质疑的灵感来自心理治疗品牌的激增,再加上认知行为疗法的主导地位。他的主要结论是:(a)该领域的紧张局势与多种极性和个人差异有关;(b) 将极化减少到任何单一的极性都是愚蠢的;(c)鉴于该领域的巨大多样性,我们都是专家。虽然作者主张理论和方法的更大整合,但他也主张通过将伦理思想纳入科学时代精神来进行扩展。他提出,作为一个人的技能是治疗师和患者的广泛愿望。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Contending With Polarization in the Expanding Scope of Psychotherapy.

The author queried 32 colleagues about their sense of polarization in the field of psychotherapy, using as an example the contrast between generalists (like himself) and specialists. This query was inspired by the proliferation of brands of psychotherapy coupled with the dominance of cognitive-behavioral therapies. His key conclusions: (a) tensions in the field are associated with a multitude of polarities and individual differences; (b) it is folly to reduce polarization to any single polarity; and (c) given the field's huge diversity, we are all specialists. While the author advocates greater integration of theories and methods, he also argues for expansion by including ethical thought into the scientific zeitgeist. He proposes skill in being human as a broad aspiration for therapists and patients.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
10.50%
发文量
159
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Psychiatric Practice® seizes the day with its emphasis on the three Rs — readability, reliability, and relevance. Featuring an eye-catching style, the journal combines clinically applicable reviews, case studies, and articles on treatment advances with practical and informative tips for treating patients. Mental health professionals will want access to this review journal — for sharpening their clinical skills, discovering the best in treatment, and navigating this rapidly changing field. Journal of Psychiatric Practice combines clinically applicable reviews, case studies, and articles on treatment advances with informative "how to" tips for surviving in a managed care environment.
期刊最新文献
The Role of Hopelessness in Patients With Borderline Personality Disorder. A False-positive Diagnosis of a Lethal Serotonin Syndrome Based on Postmortem Whole-blood Levels of Sertraline: How Forensic Detective Work Uses Medical Knowledge and Clinical Pharmacology to Solve Cases. Acceptance and Commitment Therapy for an Emerging Adult Female With Misophonia: A Case Study. Depression and the Olympics. Eating Behaviors Associated With Suicidal Behaviors and Overall Risk.
×
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