Dr James Davies (PhD) 💭 Profile picture
Sep 7 7 tweets 2 min read Read on X
A short 🧵on how therapy works. Firstly, the kind of therapy (CBT, humanistic, psychodynamic, etc) does not solely determine outcomes. Research shows that *common factors* shared across therapies account for the majority of any improvement. Here’s what that research tells us👇
2/ e.g Research by Michael Lambert’s et al (based on dozens of metaanalyses) breaks down the influence of different factors on good therapy outcomes:
40%: Client factors & life circumstances
30%: Therapeutic relationship
15%: Expectancy/placebo effects
15%: Technique or method
3/ But what about the characteristics of the therapist?- are they not important too? Well, of course. Common factors Research shows they're integral to all aspects of the work, influencing everything from the depth of the therapeutic relationship; to how strong the alliance is...
4/...to how efficacious the technique is, to how much hope/engagement the client can muster. Practitioner traits enabling good outcomes also include the capacity to be empathetic, deeply listen, to be flexible, culturally sensitive & able to carefully challenge & repair ruptures
5/ Further, even within the same therapeutic model, different therapists wont get the same results.
Some therapists within the same model consistently outperform others irrespective of the clients seen. That suggests that *who* the therapist is matters more than *what* they do...
6/ This is to say, the personal qualities of the therapist, amplify the power & potential positive impact of any technique. A cold or rigid therapist using the 'right' method won’t get far, while a skilled, warm therapist can make even a modest intervention more effective.
7/ In the end: Outcome research indicates that therapy works best when the qualities of the client, approach & therapist all align positively to effect change. If you are interested in reading more, then here's a good primer to start with: academic.oup.com/book/30015

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Dr James Davies (PhD) 💭

Dr James Davies (PhD) 💭 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @JDaviesPhD

Aug 9
🧵 What do SSRIs really do to your emotions?
A major Oxford study (by researchers supportive of antidepressants) explored the lived experiences of SSRI users (experiences not captured by RCTs). What participants revealed about emotional blunting is disturbing… So here we go👇
1. General flattening of all emotions: Most participants said their emotions felt ‘dulled’ ‘numbed’ or ‘blocked’ by SSRIs. Some couldn’t feel at all, and just thought about how they should feel. Even joy, grief or love often felt distant or ‘fake’....
2. Loss of positive emotions: Nearly all participants described a marked drop in joy, excitement, love, affection and passion. They no longer felt uplifted by music, hobbies or even felt close connection with loved ones....
Read 11 tweets
Jul 11
🧵My response in the New York Times: “If you are looking at people on the drugs for eight weeks, you are not going to find withdrawal,” said James Davies... “It’s like saying cocaine isn’t addictive because we did a study on people who had only been taking it for eight weeks."👇
1/ Dr. Davies, an associate professor of psychology at the University of Roehampton in England, said he worried that the findings, “if read uncritically,” would “cause considerable harm by significantly downplaying the effects of real-world antidepressant use.”
2/ “According to their [the study's] conclusions, the tens of thousands of people online who are struggling with severe and protracted withdrawal aren’t really in withdrawal,” he said....
Read 4 tweets
Jul 5
Heads up, everyone! Something big is coming next week. It concerns psychiatry's blockbuster drug - the antidepressant. This thread breaks down what’s about to happen, why it matters & what’s at stake 👇
1. Next week a major study will be published by some of the biggest names in drug-company-funded psychiatry; many with track records of minimising antidepressant withdrawal. It’s expected to downplay withdrawal, based on flawed, mostly short-term studies - many pharma-funded.
2. The Science Media Centre (which also receives pharma funding) will host a closed-door press briefing next Tuesday, to promote the paper; inviting top UK health journalists. Who's on the panel? Mostly industry-linked experts who are expected to agree with or praise the paper.
Read 7 tweets
Jun 28
A thread 🧵 showing why people are rightly angry about the corruption between psychiatry & pharma.

It concerns the psychiatrist, Joseph Biederman, & the 'Harvard Scandal', which helped fuel a highly damaging wave of antipsychotic drugging in children.

Here's what happened 👇
2/ Joseph Biederman was a world-renowned child psychiatrist at Harvard; one of the brightest lights of his profession. He played a leading role in popularising so-called ‘bipolar disorder’ in young children & in promoting the use of antipsychotic drugs to ‘treat’ them.
3/ However in 2008, a US Senate investigation, led by Senator Chuck Grassley, revealed that Biederman had failed to disclose over $1.6 million in personal payments from pharmaceutical companies. Among them, was the drug company J & J, which makes the antipsychotic, Risperdal.
Read 6 tweets
Jun 19
🧵Awais Aftab’s recent post on “over-diagnosis” doesn’t merely defend the diagnostic status quo; it goes a step further by portraying the DSM as “rather conservative” & suggesting it may fall short precisely because it excludes too much suffering from its ideological grasp....1/5
...This framing reinforces the idea that all suffering requires a psychiatric meaning & that diagnostic inflation is a clincial good. It downplays the fact that previous diagnositc inflation has less improved clinical outcomes than pharma/psychiatric power & profits....2/5
...and that such inflation as enabled the spread of a damaging ideology that has systematically pathologised, individualised, decollectivised, depoliticised & commodified distress - great for the neoliberal economy, as I argue in my book, but not so much for the rest of us... 3/5
Read 6 tweets
Jun 13
A 🧵thread on why claiming 'psychiatry is just like any other medical specialty' glosses over major differences. It’s a convenient slogan; not an honest comparison. Here's why 👇
1/ Most medical diagnoses are based on objective tests (bloods, imaging, urine tests etc), while psychiatry predominantly relies on subjective interpretation of behaviour & self-reports alone, which are then matched to ‘categories’ of distress, created by committee consensus....
2/ Psychiatry involves coercion, forced medication & court-mandated treatment. These powers don’t exist in the same way in other medical fields, making psychiatry more vulnerable to perpetuating abuse, particularly against marginalised & less powerful groups...
Read 9 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(