| SUBSCRIBER LOGIN |
|---|
| News Briefs | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
||||||||||
| Polls |
|---|
| Special Offer |
|---|
|
|
| Treatment Variables Than Can Add or Detract from Outcome |
| Columns - Research to Practice | ||||||||
| Written by Michael Taleff, PhD, CSAS, MAC | ||||||||
| Friday, 05 October 2007 | ||||||||
|
Research from two articles that address the matching hypothesis (i.e., therapists should match their interventions and strategies to a particular client) provide information that could help clinicians obtain better treatment outcomes. Matching may matter Since Project MATCH (Project MATCH Research Group, 1997), a lot of folks thought the whole matching idea was dead, especially since Project MATCH did not lend any support to matching clients to particular treatments. Reexamining the matching hypothesis, a survey conducted by Karno and Longabaugh (2007) retrospectively examined 137 clients. Instead of examining specific treatment effectiveness across a wide variety of clients, as Project MATCH did, they concentrated on the role of specific therapist behaviors that were matched, unmatched or mismatched to four types of client variables. The different variables consisted of: Want to read the entire article? Don't miss out...Subscribe now to Counselor Magazine—or buy the single issue! It's easy. Just follow the links below:
Powered by !JoomlaComment 3.25
3.25 Copyright (C) 2007 Alain Georgette / Copyright (C) 2006 Frantisek Hliva. All rights reserved." |
||||||||
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|

















