Jim Orford1. 1. Alcohol, Drugs, Gambling and Addiction Research Group, School of Psychology, University of Birmingham and Substance Misuse Services, Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Trust, Birmingham, UK. j.f.orford@bham.ac.uk
Abstract
AIM: To identify possible reasons for the disappointingly negative results of methodologically rigorous controlled trials of psychological treatments in the addictions field. METHOD: A selective overview of the literature on addictive behaviour change. FINDINGS: Eight failings of existing research are described: failing to account for the outcome equivalence paradox; neglecting relationships in favour of techniques; failing to integrate treatment research and research on unaided change; imposing an inappropriate time-scale on the change process; failing to take a systems or social network view; ignoring therapists' tacit theories; not including the patient's view; and displaying an ignorance of modern developments in the philosophy of science. CONCLUSION: Treatment research has been asking the wrong questions in the wrong way. Three necessary shifts in ways of conducting research are proposed: (i) the field should stop studying named techniques and focus instead on change processes; (ii) change processes should be studied within the broader, longer-acting systems of which treatment is part; and (iii) science in the field should be brought up to date by acknowledging a variety of sources of useful knowledge.
AIM: To identify possible reasons for the disappointingly negative results of methodologically rigorous controlled trials of psychological treatments in the addictions field. METHOD: A selective overview of the literature on addictive behaviour change. FINDINGS: Eight failings of existing research are described: failing to account for the outcome equivalence paradox; neglecting relationships in favour of techniques; failing to integrate treatment research and research on unaided change; imposing an inappropriate time-scale on the change process; failing to take a systems or social network view; ignoring therapists' tacit theories; not including the patient's view; and displaying an ignorance of modern developments in the philosophy of science. CONCLUSION: Treatment research has been asking the wrong questions in the wrong way. Three necessary shifts in ways of conducting research are proposed: (i) the field should stop studying named techniques and focus instead on change processes; (ii) change processes should be studied within the broader, longer-acting systems of which treatment is part; and (iii) science in the field should be brought up to date by acknowledging a variety of sources of useful knowledge.
Authors: Douglas L Polcin; Jennifer Sterling; Thomas Brown; Michelle Brown; Raymond Buscemi; Rachael Korcha Journal: J Contemp Psychother Date: 2015-09