Open Door Review

"#0!@B*$7#!=((27#90*(E!2*&!'::07($Y0*066!/%)j07(![@FK/^!!

'%#2%&(_!;>_!@0%(0*6_!K>_!F0*07M0_!8>_!p0#0(<0$(*0%_!@>_!G!Hl%C_!Q>![+,-,^>!I<$*$67#0!/%2c$6!B*&!:)%92<$6$0%(0! O$2D*)6($M?!AJ66(!6$7#!&0%!F0%$7#(!:T%!&0*!SB(27#(0%!9$(!0$*09!N/OE52($*D!Y0%D<0$7#0*n!~8<$*$72!! Hl%C_!Q>_!"%JD0%_!@>_!Q$0D<_!S>_!G!@0%(0*6_!K>![+,--^>!'$*62(C!&0%!N/O!$*!&0%!/647#)(#0%21$0:)%67#B*D! ~;91<090*(2($)*!):!N/O!$*!1647#)(#0%214!%0602%7#>! '(A?-",-%#@:)%&)+&'(A?-)@,#)%O&'(A?-",-%#@:%>,)(?-%#& Z%*)f)+&>+*&KB)+)(?-%#&'(A?-"B"L)%O&Ig _!]-E.]>!! Hl%CEQ2D6(0((0%_!Q>_!@0%(0*6_!K>_!;61#)%&$*D_!Q>_!FB7##0$9_!=>_!G!"2B3*0%_!Q>![+,-.^>!8#2*D06!):!50:<07($Y0! LB*7($)*$*D!&B%$*D!1647#)2*2<4($7!1647#)(#0%21$06>! N">#+@B&"!&,-%&/$%#)?@+&'(A?-"@+@BA,)?&/(("?)@,)"+O&)+& :#%(( >!! @0%(0*6_!K>![+,,\^>!'$*!j0&06!A030*!$6(!2*&0%6!E!/!;*!S>! iT((092**!['&>^_! K"$:@#@,)<%&K@(>)(,)a&V&;)%&:(A?-"B"L)(?-%&/+@BA(%&(:%f)!)(?-%#&2+,=)?aB>+L(:-h+"$%+%& [11>! -P-E-P\^>!A0*D0%$7#?!/236(>! F$152! The Munich Attachment- and Effectiveness Project (MBWP) is a naturalistic prospective psychotherapy study examining process and outcome of psychoanalytic psychotherapies. =&.4$'! At baseline, the Operationalized Psychodynamic Diagnostics (OPD-2, OPD Taskforce, 2008) were applied. Then, using the Heidelberg Structural Change Scale (HSCS, Rudolf et al. 2000), five therapeutic foci were chosen, reflecting difficulties in relationship patterns (one focus), psychodynamic conflicts (one to three foci) and impairments in personality structure (one to three foci) (e.g. Hörz et al. 2011). For attachment classification the "Adult Attachment Interview" (AAI) and the "Adult Attachment Projective" (AAP) were employed and the "Reflective Functioning Scale" (RF) was applied to the AAI for the assessment of Reflective Functioning. Furthermore, at baseline and at follow-up, a number of self-reports were used: "Gießen-Test", "Narzißmus-Inventar", "Bielefelder Fragebogen zur Klientenerwartung" (BFKE) and "Symptom-Check-List" (SCL-90). The 20 psychoanalysts recorded several sessions on audiotape at up to five points in time (three to five sessions around baseline, around the 80th session, the 160th session, the 240th session and the 300rd session). The study was set up following a quasi-experimental design: half of the psychotherapists (N=10) received an introduction to attachment research applied to the results from their patient's AAI and AAP (two 90 minute sessions per patient, overall 20 sessions). The other ten psychotherapists were introduced to a dream coding method (Moser & Zeppelin, 1996) and spent 20 sessions discussing the application of this method to the initial dreams of their patients and relating these to the psychodynamic impressions emerging from the first therapy sessions. One of our hypotheses examines the question if in the first group this sensitization for questions relating to attachment research could enhance the understanding of separation traumas during treatment and hence lead to a change of the attachment classification. However, the main focus of this study is on researching microprocesses and interactions (across the mentioned points in time as well as a follow-up assessment one year after treatment). The following instruments were employed: the plan formulation method (PFM) to assess the patient's unconscious therapy goals, his or her pathogenic beliefs, test situations as well as plan compatibility of therapist interventions; the psychotherapy process Q-Sort (PQS) to obtain the most and least characteristic

.01230/1.40/5&&'67894/0/571.8/5&&/6648./1.40&

Made with FlippingBook Ebook Creator