In this article, I critique the empirically supported treatment (EST) movement and discuss the limitations of traditional psychotherapy research from a psychoanalytic perspective. The EST movement is based on a medical model that assumes that a psychotherapeutic treatment can be conceptualized independent of the human relationship in which it takes place. Psychotherapy and psychoanalysis are, however, treatments only in a metaphorical sense and are more akin to educational processes than medical treatments. Every therapeutic dyad is unique, and research that treats therapy as a standardized, disembodied entity will not contribute to our understanding. Nevertheless, there is a real need for psychoanalysts to become more actively involved in psychotherapy research both for political and scientific reasons. Although I do not believe that “empirical validation” in the form envisaged by the American Psychological Association task force is a realistic goal, I do believe in the value of microscopic studies of therapeutic process, particularly in the context of research-informed case histories.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hans H. Strupp (2001) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched one closely related paper. Consider it for comparative context: