What is it about?

This article engages in the discourse on treatment outcome from the perspective of clinicians working with a variety of diagnoses and populations, in an individual or group practice, or in a clinic or institution with no time or financial resources allocated for research and evaluation purposes. Psychologists managing a practice or institution are expected to provide scientific evidence of the efficacy and efficiency of psychotherapy. Can they replicate outcome research in their practice? Should they apply a specific method to all patients with the same symptoms, or tailor interventions to each person? Should they implement state and traits theoretical principles, or follow their judgment on treatment decision-making? The conclusion points to informed opinions to validate other psychologists’ work, while the field is debating the necessary and sufficient conditions for an integrated or defined approach.

Featured Image

Why is it important?

How do we know that what clinicians do in psychotherapy is of therapeutic value to their patients? As psychologists manage a practice or institution they are expected to provide scientific evidence of the efficacy and efficiency of psychotherapy. The article deals with the question of how to apply outcome research and theory into praxis.


The author reflects on these questions through the prism of her work as clinician, director of inpatient and outpatient settings, and supervisor. She reviews literature in support of different methodologies and theories of psychotherapy, and reports her findings on integrating science into praxis.

Doctor Hava Mendelberg

Read the Original

This page is a summary of: Outcome research, theory, and evaluation of psychotherapy in praxis., The Psychologist-Manager Journal, October 2018, American Psychological Association (APA), DOI: 10.1037/mgr0000076.
You can read the full text:



The following have contributed to this page