Therapeutic Alliance and Alliance Ruptures and Resolutions: Theoretical Definitions, Assessment Issues, and Research Findings

Alliance rupture profiles by personality disorder pathology in psychotherapy for depression: Tendencies, development, and timing

OBJECTIVE

Clinical and theoretical considerations presume that patients with different personality disorder (PD) clusters will be associated with distinct alliance rupture profiles; however, there is scarce empirical literature examining this. The present study adopted a systematic framework for investigating profiles of alliance ruptures for individuals belonging to each of the three PD clusters.

METHOD

The sample consisted of 94 patients from a randomized controlled trial for treatment of depression. PD cluster features were assessed at intake and ruptures were assessed across treatment. Three sets of multilevel analyses were conducted to test differences between the PD clusters in the general tendency to show a rupture profile, rupture development throughout the treatment, and timing of predicting ruptures by PD within sessions.

RESULTS

The three clusters were associated with distinct profiles of alliance ruptures. Clusters A and B were characterized by a general tendency to show more withdrawal and confrontation ruptures. Cluster A had a greater decrease in confrontation ruptures over the course of treatment, while cluster B had a greater decrease in withdrawal ruptures. Cluster C was characterized by a general tendency to show fewer withdrawal and confrontation ruptures, with a greater increase in both ruptures over the course of treatment. For withdrawal ruptures, the differences between clusters were evident from the beginning of sessions, whereas for confrontation ruptures, there was less of a difference between beginning and end of sessions.

CONCLUSION

The distinct profiles of alliance ruptures for each PD cluster may contribute to progress towards tailoring treatment to individuals with PDs.

Psychodynamic Psychotherapy Process Research: A quick ride through what you should know about process (research)

This paper gives an overview of psychoanalytic process research, which brings to light the complexity of psychotherapy sessions. This complexity is so rich that many instruments intended to make the process measurable failed in the past because they initially used a strategy of complexity reduction. This method however did not help to further our understanding of the complexity involved. Three former presidents of the Society for Psychotherapy Research (Stiles, Hill, Elliot 2015) decided to solve the following equivalence paradox: many therapies work successfully though they all follow different theories, produce a heterogeneity of processes and often enough a misfit between what theories maintain to be a good process and their realization in the treatment room. As theories are often compared to maps, a driver would wonder which route to take. But therapists-as-drivers go undaunted - and nevertheless achieve their goals together with their patients. Norcross and Wampold (2018) found that good therapists invent new therapies with every new patient. They hypothesize that it is because of conversation. This is in accord with the 3 former presidents' proposal to return to detailed single case analyses including the micro-analytic power of conversation analysis of which a few insights are outlined in this article.