Open Door Review

8#2*D0!

=6606690*(!90(#)&6!:)%!1647#)2*2<4($7!)360%Y2($)*

Al::<0%EQ(26(M2_!H>_!Q($D<0%_!I>_![+,--^>!O0%!=::0M(Z2#%*0#9B*D!B*&!=::0M(%0DB<2($)*!fE6)%(E"06(![=5'f^?! V2<$&$0%B*D!B*&!IB%C:)%9>!z"#0!=::07(!'c10%$0*70!2*&!=::07(!50DB<2($)*!fEQ)%(!"06(![=5'f^?!Y2<$&2($)*!2*&! 6#)%(!Y0%6$)*{! ''$'&V&'(A?-",-%#@:)%&r&'(A?-"("$@,)a&r&Z%*)f)+)(?-%&'(A?-"B"L)% _! gI _!++.E+P+>!ON;?!-,>-,..u6E ,,P,E-+gP-]g! Al::<0%EQ(26(M2_!H>!G!F![+,-,^>!=6606690*(!())<6!:)%!2::07(!%0DB<2($)*!2*&!UB2<$(4!):!)3j07(!%0<2($)*6!$*! 10%6)*2<$(4!&$6)%&0%6?!"#0!1%0&$7($Y0!$9127(!)*!$*$($2! `>BB%,)+&"!&,-%&Z%++)+L%#&8B)+)? _! bl [-^_!+\E]]>!ON;?!-,>-.+-u3B97>+,-,>d]>->+\! Al::<0%EQ(26(M2_!H>_!F!G!i2*&![+,,\^>!V)%2B662D0M%2:(!:T%!&$0!"#0%21$0E;*2*61%B7#*2#90!30$! /0%6l*<$7#M0$(66(l%B*D0*?!QK=/E+,,!B*&!QI;OE;;!$9!V0%D<0$7#!z/%0&$7($Y0!/)Z0%!)*!(#0%214!0*D2D090*(!$*! 10%6)*2<$(4!&$6)%&0%6?!QK=/!h!+,,!Y0%6B6!Q8;OE;;{>! ''$'&V&'(A?-",-%#@:)%&r&'(A?-"("$@,)a&r&Z%*)f)+)(?-%& '(A?-"B"L)% _! gH _!P]+EP]\>!ON;?!-,>-,..u6E,,+\E-+Pb+\\! W(*&,!>-001(3! Use of Q-sort assessment methods for diagnostic purposes and in treatment evaluation Objectives: Does quantifying psychotherapy research do justice to its subject matter? Methods: Q-sort techniques are presented for the assessment of personality pathology, mental and interpersonal problems, as well as for quantifying the psychotherapeutic process. ;&2-5.2\! In studies on psychotherapy planning we identified mechanisms characteristic of nonresponders which could be efficiently captured with q-sort methods. Fromthese clinically relevant intervention techniques can be derived. In psychoanalytic process research we operationalized relevant microelements in the patient-therapist interaction. Conclusions: Q-sort methods are efficient and helpful for studying research questions that are clinically relevant but often difficult to grasp as well as for dismantling studies. First, we investigated the validity of the prototype-matching, empirically based 200-item Shedler-Westen Assessment Procedure (SWAP-200) and its clinical utility for describing underlying dimensions of psychostructural organization and functioning. Patients (n = 306) from two psychoanalytic out-patient departments were included. Replicatory and exploratory factor analysis, correlation and discriminant validity statistics, and canonical correlation analysis were performed. Standard factor analysis revealed an eight-factor solution displaying a dimensional description of psychostructural personality organization (high functioning - neurotic/inhibited - borderline/emotionally dysregulated - psychotic/dissocial). Discriminant validity exists across the sample owing to high/poor psychological functioning. Canonical correlation analysis does not support the replacement of the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV, but provides relevant implications for refining DSM-IV axis II. Support is given for the SWAP instrument in describing dimensional higher-order personality organization and psychostructural functioning. On the road to DSM-V, instruments are demanded that provide clinically meaningful information, for example, predictions about psychotherapy utilization. Comparison of five different instruments in a sample of 297 patients with personality disorders showed that the Structured Clinical Interviews for DSM-IV (SCID), SWAP-200, and the Inventory of Interpersonal Problems (IIP) lead to predictive models concerning initial therapy engagement. The Affect Experience and Affect Regulation Q-sort (AREQ) provided information concerning therapy rejection. The findings point to the importance of interpersonal, affective, and psycho-structural functioning in the diagnostic procedure of personality disorders. Concerning affect regulation, the empirically defined factors used in the Austrian sample of our study

4'20&&;443&&32D.2E&&F&&19.3;&&2;.1.40&&GHIJ&&F& PPQ

Made with FlippingBook Ebook Creator