Research matters to our profession, and it seems that it also matters to readers of Therapy Today 鈥� 鈥榬esearch updates鈥� was a popular answer to the 鈥榃hat would you like to see more of?鈥� question in our recent survey. So I am delighted to introduce our new section, 鈥楻esearch digest鈥�, compiled by Senior Research Fellow George Salaminios.
Research is relevant for every practitioner, he says, generating new knowledge to support high-quality standards of practice: 鈥業n addition, research is hugely important for the wider profession as it can demonstrate the effectiveness of counselling and psychotherapy to support the commissioning of services for those who need them and increase access to effective therapies.鈥�
For me, among the highlights of the new section are the 鈥榬esearch bites鈥� that sum up some of the papers in Counselling and Psychotherapy Research, the peer-reviewed journal available free for all 香港六合彩精准资料 members (via the website). If you hadn鈥檛 realised or had forgotten that this came as part of your membership fee, I highly recommend a regular visit and browse.
It鈥檚 validating for all of us to have a growing evidence base for what we do, but there are still gaps to fill, as I discovered when I started working on our 鈥楤ig issue鈥� report for this edition, on the growth of 鈥榝lexible鈥� approaches to therapy session frequency/duration.
The idea for the piece came out of several conversations with fellow practitioners where we admitted that the bulk of our clients were fortnightly. Despite this working well both therapeutically and practically for clients and also practitioners, it seems there is still a sense of therapy not being 鈥榩roper鈥� unless it takes place in weekly 50-minute sessions.
But there is no evidence that this 鈥榙ose鈥� of therapy is any more effective than any other. When I looked into the research, it seems that the quality of the relationship matters more than the number of minutes spent in the therapy room (perhaps no surprises there), but what can make a difference to client outcomes is giving them autonomy over when and how often they have their sessions. It was interesting to explore how this might work in practice, and also think about the possible downsides for both clients (not great for those with avoidant tendencies) and us as practitioners (not least the increased uncertainty about income). I would love to hear your feedback on that report and also about your experiences of being flexible with client sessions.
Elsewhere in this issue, we have a riveting analysis of the so-called false memory wars of the 1990s by Lynda Mia Thompson, who describes therapists needing to be on their guard at the time, for fear of being accused of dredging up 鈥榝alse memories鈥� in clients. Don鈥檛 miss that compelling read. We鈥檝e also got an excellent 鈥楤ig interview鈥� by Catherine Jackson with business therapist and writer Naomi Shragai, who has built a career analysing the family dynamics played out in the workplace.
I鈥檇 like to thank all the contributors to this issue who have shared the benefit of their experience 鈥� if you鈥檇 also like to get involved, get in touch by emailing therapytoday@thinkpublishing.co.uk
Sally Brown, Editor
