被儿童性吸引的客户在治疗中的秘密。

IF 2.6 1区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Psychotherapy Research Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2023-10-17 DOI:10.1080/10503307.2023.2265047
Sara Jahnke, Nicholas Blagden, Ian V McPhail, Jan Antfolk
{"title":"被儿童性吸引的客户在治疗中的秘密。","authors":"Sara Jahnke, Nicholas Blagden, Ian V McPhail, Jan Antfolk","doi":"10.1080/10503307.2023.2265047","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><i>Objective</i> This study investigated the reasons why pedohebephilic clients disclose their sexual attraction to children in therapy and the experiences associated with this decision among English-speaking samples. <b>Method</b>: The pre-registered online survey combined (1) quantitative correlational data of self-reported improvement, alliance, therapist reaction to disclosure, and the belief that mandatory reporting laws were in place, and (2) qualitative data about reasons for disclosure or no disclosure as well as perceived consequences. The sample consisted of pedohebephilic people who have been clients in therapy and have disclosed (<i>n</i> = 96) or not disclosed (<i>n</i> = 40). <b>Results:</b> While the disclosure and no disclosure groups did not differ in improvement or beliefs about mandatory reporting, those who had disclosed reported a stronger alliance. Clients who did not perceive the therapist's reaction as supportive reported less improvement than the no disclosure group. Thematic analysis of qualitative data identified three themes concerning motives for disclosing or not disclosing and a fourth regarding differential impacts of disclosure. <b>Discussion</b>: This study indicates that disclosing pedohebephilia does not in and of itself lead to improvement but is contingent on a therapist's reaction.</p>","PeriodicalId":48159,"journal":{"name":"Psychotherapy Research","volume":" ","pages":"941-956"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Secret-keeping in therapy by clients who are sexually attracted to children.\",\"authors\":\"Sara Jahnke, Nicholas Blagden, Ian V McPhail, Jan Antfolk\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10503307.2023.2265047\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><i>Objective</i> This study investigated the reasons why pedohebephilic clients disclose their sexual attraction to children in therapy and the experiences associated with this decision among English-speaking samples. <b>Method</b>: The pre-registered online survey combined (1) quantitative correlational data of self-reported improvement, alliance, therapist reaction to disclosure, and the belief that mandatory reporting laws were in place, and (2) qualitative data about reasons for disclosure or no disclosure as well as perceived consequences. The sample consisted of pedohebephilic people who have been clients in therapy and have disclosed (<i>n</i> = 96) or not disclosed (<i>n</i> = 40). <b>Results:</b> While the disclosure and no disclosure groups did not differ in improvement or beliefs about mandatory reporting, those who had disclosed reported a stronger alliance. Clients who did not perceive the therapist's reaction as supportive reported less improvement than the no disclosure group. Thematic analysis of qualitative data identified three themes concerning motives for disclosing or not disclosing and a fourth regarding differential impacts of disclosure. <b>Discussion</b>: This study indicates that disclosing pedohebephilia does not in and of itself lead to improvement but is contingent on a therapist's reaction.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48159,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychotherapy Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"941-956\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychotherapy Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10503307.2023.2265047\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/10/17 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychotherapy Research","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10503307.2023.2265047","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的本研究在英语样本中调查恋童癖客户在治疗中向儿童透露性吸引力的原因以及与此相关的经历。方法:预先注册的在线调查结合了(1)自我报告的改善、联盟、治疗师对披露的反应以及相信强制性报告法已经到位的定量相关数据,以及(2)关于披露或不披露的原因以及感知后果的定性数据。样本包括恋童癖患者,他们是治疗的客户,并披露了(n = 96)或未公开(n = 40)。结果:虽然披露组和不披露组在强制性报告的改进或信念方面没有差异,但那些披露过的人报告说,他们之间的联盟更强。那些不认为治疗师的反应是支持性的客户报告说,与不披露组相比,改善较少。对定性数据的专题分析确定了三个主题,涉及披露或不披露的动机,第四个主题涉及披露的不同影响。讨论:这项研究表明,公开恋童癖本身并不能带来改善,而是取决于治疗师的反应。
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
Secret-keeping in therapy by clients who are sexually attracted to children.

Objective This study investigated the reasons why pedohebephilic clients disclose their sexual attraction to children in therapy and the experiences associated with this decision among English-speaking samples. Method: The pre-registered online survey combined (1) quantitative correlational data of self-reported improvement, alliance, therapist reaction to disclosure, and the belief that mandatory reporting laws were in place, and (2) qualitative data about reasons for disclosure or no disclosure as well as perceived consequences. The sample consisted of pedohebephilic people who have been clients in therapy and have disclosed (n = 96) or not disclosed (n = 40). Results: While the disclosure and no disclosure groups did not differ in improvement or beliefs about mandatory reporting, those who had disclosed reported a stronger alliance. Clients who did not perceive the therapist's reaction as supportive reported less improvement than the no disclosure group. Thematic analysis of qualitative data identified three themes concerning motives for disclosing or not disclosing and a fourth regarding differential impacts of disclosure. Discussion: This study indicates that disclosing pedohebephilia does not in and of itself lead to improvement but is contingent on a therapist's reaction.

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
Psychotherapy Research
Psychotherapy Research PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
10.30%
发文量
68
期刊介绍: Psychotherapy Research seeks to enhance the development, scientific quality, and social relevance of psychotherapy research and to foster the use of research findings in practice, education, and policy formulation. The Journal publishes reports of original research on all aspects of psychotherapy, including its outcomes, its processes, education of practitioners, and delivery of services. It also publishes methodological, theoretical, and review articles of direct relevance to psychotherapy research. The Journal is addressed to an international, interdisciplinary audience and welcomes submissions dealing with diverse theoretical orientations, treatment modalities.
期刊最新文献
A first look at diversity gaps in psychotherapy research publications and representation. Are perceptions of the psychotherapist affected by the audiovisual quality of a teletherapy session? Decentering as a mediator of the effect of mindfulness on emotional distress: Evidence from cross-sectional and longitudinal designs. Therapists' emotional responses and their relation to patients' experience of attunement and responsiveness. Adolescent, caregivers, and therapists' experiences of youth and family suicide intervention: A qualitative study.
×
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