Browse by author
Lookup NU author(s): Alyson Flitcroft, Professor Mark FreestonORCiD, Amy Wood-Mitchell
Full text for this publication is not currently held within this repository. Alternative links are provided below where available.
Research suggests that there is low inter-rater reliability between therapists when asked to formulate the same case and that there may be discrepancies in what is considered an essential part of a formulation. The present study aimed to explore the diversity of therapists' viewpoints regarding the purpose and essential features of a cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) case formulation of depression. A Q-sort methodology was used in order to render these beliefs operational. Seven experienced CBT therapists participated in the construction of 86 statements, capturing concepts considered relevant to a CBT formulation of depression. This Q-sort was then administered to 23 therapists, who rated these statements in terms of their importance using a Q-sort procedure. Three factors emerged, suggesting three dominant opinions as to the importance of features of a formulation. A "state" CBT factor, focusing on the "here and now", accounted for most variance; followed by a second factor emphasizing "function and process" and a third factor emphasizing "trait" components. Whilst there was some agreement between what was considered to be least important in a formulation, the emergence of three distinct viewpoints suggests a lack of complete consensus amongst the therapists. © 2007 British Association for Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapies.
Author(s): Flitcroft A, James IA, Freeston M, Wood-Mitchell A
Publication type: Article
Publication status: Published
Journal: Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy
Year: 2007
Volume: 35
Issue: 3
Pages: 325-333
ISSN (print): 13524658
ISSN (electronic): 1469-1833
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S135246580600350X
DOI: 10.1017/S135246580600350X
Altmetrics provided by Altmetric
