1932

Abstract

Psychotherapies may work through techniques that are specific to each therapy or through factors that all therapies have in common. Proponents of the common factors model often point to meta-analyses of comparative outcome studies that show all therapies have comparable effects. However, not all meta-analyses support the common factors model; the included studies often have several methodological problems; and there are alternative explanations for finding comparable outcomes. To date, research on the working mechanisms and mediators of therapies has always been correlational, and in order to establish that a mediator is indeed a causal factor in the recovery process of a patient, studies must show a temporal relationship between the mediator and an outcome, a dose–response association, evidence that no third variable causes changes in the mediator and the outcome, supportive experimental research, and have a strong theoretical framework. Currently, no common or specific factor meets these criteria and can be considered an empirically validated working mechanism. Therefore, it is still unknown whether therapies work through common or specific factors, or both.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-050718-095424
2019-05-07
2024-04-14
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/clinpsy/15/1/annurev-clinpsy-050718-095424.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-050718-095424&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Ahn H, Wampold BE 2001. Where oh where are the specific ingredients? A meta-analysis of component studies in counseling and psychotherapy. J. Counsel. Psychol. 48:251–57
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Baardseth TP, Goldberg SB, Pace BT, Wislocki AP, Frost ND et al. 2013. Cognitive-behavioral therapy versus other therapies: redux. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 33:395–405
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Baron RM, Kenny DA 1986. The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 51:1173–82
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Barth J, Munder T, Gerger H, Nuesch E, Trelle S et al. 2013. Comparative efficacy of seven psychotherapeutic interventions for patients with depression: a network meta-analysis. PLOS Med 10:e1001454
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Bell EC, Marcus DK, Goodlad JK 2013. Are the parts as good as the whole? A meta-analysis of component treatment studies. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 81:722–36
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Berking M, Ebert D, Cuijpers P, Hofmann SG 2013. Emotion regulation skills training enhances the efficacy of inpatient cognitive behavioral therapy for major depressive disorder: a randomized controlled trial. Psychother. Psychosom. 82:234–45
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Bisson JI, Roberts NP, Andrew M, Cooper R, Lewis C 2013. Psychological therapies for chronic post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in adults. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 12:CD003388
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Borkovec TD, Costonguay LG 1998. What is the scientific meaning of empirically supported therapy?. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 66:136–42
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Borkovec TD, Sibrava NJ 2005. Problems with the use of placebo conditions in psychotherapy research, suggested alternatives, and some strategies for the pursuit of the placebo phenomenon. J. Clin. Psychol. 61:805–18
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Braun SR, Gregor B, Tran US 2013. Comparing bona fide psychotherapies of depression in adults with two meta-analytical approaches. PLOS ONE 8:e68135
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Budd R, Hughes I 2009. The Dodo Bird Verdict—controversial, inevitable and important: a commentary on 30 years of meta-analyses. Clin. Psychol. Psychother. 16:510–22
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Carroll L (1865) 1998. Alice's Adventures in Wonderland Chicago, IL: VolumeOne
  13. Chatterton ML, Stockings E, Berk M, Barendregt JJ, Carter R, Mihalopoulos C 2017. Psychosocial therapies for the adjunctive treatment of bipolar disorder in adults: network meta-analysis. Br. J. Psychiatry 210:333–41
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Chen L, Zhang G, Hu M, Liang X 2015. Eye movement desensitization and reprocessing versus cognitive-behavioral therapy for adult posttraumatic stress disorder: systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Nerv. Mental Dis. 203:443–51
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Chisholm D, Sweeny K, Sheehan P, Rasmussen B, Smit F et al. 2016. Scaling-up treatment of depression and anxiety: a global return on investment analysis. Lancet Psychiatry 3:415–24
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Cristea IA, Gentili C, Cotet CD, Palomba D, Barbui C, Cuijpers P 2017. Efficacy of psychotherapies for borderline personality disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Psychiatry 74:319–71
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Cristea IA, Huibers MJH, David D, Hollon SD, Andersson G, Cuijpers P 2015. The effects of cognitive behavior therapy for adult depression on dysfunctional thinking: a meta-analysis. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 42:62–71
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Cristea IA, Ioannidis JPA 2018. Improving disclosure of financial conflicts of interest for research on psychosocial interventions. JAMA Psychiatry 75:355–65
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Cuijpers P 1998. Minimising interventions in the treatment and prevention of depression: taking the consequences of the ‘Dodo Bird Verdict. .’ J. Mental Health 7:355–65
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Cuijpers P 2016. Are all psychotherapies equally effective in the treatment of adult depression? The lack of statistical power of comparative outcome studies. Evid. Based Mental Health 19:39–42
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Cuijpers P, Berking M, Andersson G, Quigley L, Kleiboer A, Dobson KS 2013. A meta-analysis of cognitive-behavioural therapy for adult depression, alone and in comparison with other treatments. Can. J. Psychiatry 58:376–85
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Cuijpers P, Cristea IA 2016. How to prove that your therapy is effective, even when it is not: a guideline. Epidemiol. Psychiatr. Sci. 25:428–35
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Cuijpers P, Cristea IA, Karyotaki E, Reijnders M, Hollon SD 2019a. Component studies of psychological treatments of adult depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychother. Res. 29:115–29
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Cuijpers P, Cristea IA, Karyotaki E, Reijnders M, Huibers MJ 2016a. How effective are cognitive behavior therapies for major depression and anxiety disorders? A meta-analytic update of the evidence. World Psychiatry 15:245–58
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Cuijpers P, de Wit L, Kleiboer A, Karyotaki E, Ebert DD 2018. Problem-solving therapy for adult depression: an updated meta-analysis. Eur. Psychiatry 48:27–37
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Cuijpers P, Donker T, Weissman MM, Ravitz P, Cristea IA 2016b. Interpersonal psychotherapy for mental health problems: a comprehensive meta-analysis. Am. J. Psychiatry 173:680–87
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Cuijpers P, Driessen E, Hollon SD, van Oppen P, Barth J, Andersson G 2012. The efficacy of non-directive supportive therapy for adult depression: a meta-analysis. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 32:280–91
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Cuijpers P, Karyotaki E, Reijnders M, Ebert DD 2019b. Was Eysenck right after all? A reassessment of the effects of psychotherapy for adult depression. Epidemiol. Psychiatr. Sci 28:121–30
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Cuijpers P, Sijbrandij M, Koole S, Huibers M, Berking M, Andersson G 2014a. Psychological treatment of generalized anxiety disorder: a meta-analysis. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 34:130–40
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Cuijpers P, Turner EH, Koole SL, van Dijke A, Smit F 2014b. What is the threshold for a clinically relevant effect? The case of major depressive disorders. Depress. Anxiety 31:374–78
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Cuijpers P, van Straten A, Bohlmeijer E, Hollon SD, Andersson G 2010. The effects of psychotherapy for adult depression are overestimated: a meta-analysis of study quality and effect size. Psychol. Med. 40:211–23
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Cusack K, Jonas DE, Forneris CA, Wines C, Sonis J et al. 2016. Psychological treatments for adults with posttraumatic stress disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 43:128–41
    [Google Scholar]
  33. DeRubeis RJ, Brotman MA, Gibbons CJ 2005. A conceptual and methodological analysis of the nonspecifics argument. Clin. Psychol. Sci. Pract. 12:174–83
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Dowrick C, Dunn G, Ayuso-Mateos JL, Dalgard OS, Page H, Lehtinen V 2000. Problem solving treatment and group psychoeducation for depression: multicentre randomised controlled trial. BMJ 321:1450–71
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Driessen E, Hegelmaier LM, Abbass AA, Barber JP, Dekker JJM et al. 2015. The efficacy of short-term psychodynamic psychotherapy for depression: a meta-analysis update. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 42:1–15
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Elliott R, Bohart AC, Watson JC, Greenberg LS 2011. Empathy. Psychotherapy Relationships That Work J Norcross 132–52 New York: Oxford Univ. Press. , 2nd ed..
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Flückiger C, Del Re AC, Wampold BE 2015. The sleeper effect: artifact or phenomenon—a brief comment on Bell et al. 2013. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 83:438–42
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Frank JD 1961. Persuasion and Healing: A Comparative Study of Psychotherapy Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press
  39. Furukawa TA, Noma H, Caldwell DM, Honyashiki M, Shinohara K et al. 2014. Waiting list may be a nocebo condition in psychotherapy trials: a contribution from network meta-analysis. Acta Psychiatr. Scand. 130:181–92
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Gelso C 2014. A tripartite model of the therapeutic relationship: theory, research, and practice. Psychother. Res. 24:117–31
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Gerger H, Munder T, Gemperli A, Nüesch E, Trelle S et al. 2014. Integrating fragmented evidence by network meta-analysis: relative effectiveness of psychological interventions for adults with post-traumatic stress disorder. Psychol. Med. 44:3151–64
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Gloaguen V, Cottraux J, Cucherat M, Blackburn I-M 1998. A meta-analysis of the effects of cognitive therapy in depressed patients. J. Affect. Disord. 49:59–72
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Godfrey KM, Gallo LC, Afari N 2015. Mindfulness-based interventions for binge eating: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Behav. Med. 38:348–62
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Grenon R, Carlucci S, Brugnera A, Schwartze D, Hammond N et al. 2018. Psychotherapy for eating disorders: a meta-analysis of direct comparisons. Psychother. Res In press. https://doi.org/10.1080/10503307.2018.1489162
    [Crossref]
  45. Hecht SS 1999. Tobacco smoke carcinogens and lung cancer. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 91:1194–210
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Higgins JPT, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC, Jüni P, Moher D et al. 2011. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 343:d5928
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Higgins JPT, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG 2003. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ 327:557–60
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Hoet AC, Burgin CJ, Eddington KM, Silvia PJ 2018. Reports of therapy skill use and their efficacy in daily life in the short-term treatment of depression. Cogn. Ther. Res. 42:184–92
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Hollon SD, Evans MD, DeRubeis RJ 1990. Cognitive mediation of relapse prevention following treatment for depression: implications of differential risk. Contemporary Psychological Approaches to Depression RE Ingram 117–36 Boston: Springer
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Horvath AO, Del Re AC, Flückiger C, Symonds D 2011. Alliance in individual psychotherapy. Psychotherapy 48:9–16
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Huibers MJ, Cuijpers P 2015. Common (nonspecific) factors in psychotherapy. The Encyclopedia of Clinical Psychology RL Cautin, SO Lilienfeld 1–6 New York: Wiley
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Ioannidis JPA, Patsopoulos NA, Evangelou E 2007. Uncertainty in heterogeneity estimates in meta-analyses. BMJ 335:914–16
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Kazantzis N, Luong HK, Usatoff AS, Impala T, Yew RY, Hofmann SG 2018. The processes of cognitive behavioral therapy: a review of meta-analyses. Cogn. Ther. Res. 42:349–57
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Kazdin AE 2007. Mediators and mechanisms of change in psychotherapy research. Annu. Rev. Clin. Psychol. 3:1–27
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Kazdin AE 2009. Understanding how and why psychotherapy leads to change. Psychother. Res. 19:418–28
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Kivlighan DM, Goldberg SB, Abbas M, Pace BT, Yulish NE et al. 2015. The enduring effects of psychodynamic treatments vis-à-vis alternative treatments: a multilevel longitudinal meta-analysis. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 40:1–14
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Kraemer HC, Kiernan M, Essex M, Kupfer DJ 2008. How and why criteria defining moderators and mediators differ between the Baron & Kenny and MacArthur approaches. Health Psychol 27:Suppl.S101–8
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Kraemer HC, Wilson GT, Fairburn CG, Agras WS 2002. Mediators and moderators of treatment effects in randomized clinical trials. Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 59:877–83
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Kriston L, Wolff A, Westphal A, Hölzel LP, Härter M 2014. Efficacy and acceptability of acute treatments for persistent depressive disorder: a network meta-analysis. Depress. Anxiety 31:621–30
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Lambert MJ 1992. Psychotherapy outcome research: implications for integrative and eclectical therapists. Handbook of Psychotherapy Integration JC Norcross, MR Goldfield 94–129 New York: Basic Books
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Lambert MJ, Ogles BM 2004. The efficacy and effectiveness of psychotherapy. Bergin and Garfield's Handbook of Psychotherapy and Behavior Change MJ Lambert 139–93 New York: Wiley
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Lambert MJ, Shimokawa K 2011. Collecting client feedback. Psychotherapy 48:72–79
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Leichsenring F, Rabung S 2011. Long-term psychodynamic psychotherapy in complex mental disorders: update of a meta-analysis. Br. J. Psychiatry 199:15–22
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Lemmens LH, Müller VN, Arntz A, Huibers MJ 2016. Mechanisms of change in psychotherapy for depression: an empirical update and evaluation of research aimed at identifying psychological mediators. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 50:95–107
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Leykin Y, DeRubeis RJ 2009. Allegiance in psychotherapy outcome research: separating association from bias. Clin. Psychol. Sci. Pract. 16:54–65
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Linde K, Rücker G, Sigterman K, Jamil S, Meissner K et al. 2015. Comparative effectiveness of psychological treatments for depressive disorders in primary care: network meta-analysis. BMC Fam. Pract. 16:103
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Lorenzo-Luaces L, DeRubeis RJ 2018. Miles to go before we sleep: advancing the understanding of psychotherapy by modeling complex processes. Cogn. Ther. Res. 42:212–17
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Lorenzo-Luaces L, DeRubeis RJ, Webb CA 2014. Client characteristics as moderators of the relation between the therapeutic alliance and outcome in cognitive therapy for depression. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 82:368–73
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Lorenzo-Luaces L, German RE, DeRubeis RJ 2015. It's complicated: the relation between cognitive change procedures, cognitive change, and symptom change in cognitive therapy for depression. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 41:3–15
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Luborsky L, Rosenthal R, Diguer L, Andrusyna TP, Berman JS et al. 2002. The Dodo Bird Verdict is alive and well—mostly. Clin. Psychol. Sci. Pract. 9:2–12
    [Google Scholar]
  71. MacKinnon DP, Fairchild AJ, Fritz MS 2007. Mediation analysis. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 58:593–614
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Marcus DK, O'Connell D, Norris AL, Sawaqdeh A 2014. Is the Dodo bird endangered in the 21st century? A meta-analysis of treatment comparison studies. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 34:519–30
    [Google Scholar]
  73. Mayo-Wilson E, Dias S, Mavranezouli I, Kew K, Clark DM et al. 2014. Psychological and pharmacological interventions for social anxiety disorder in adults: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Lancet Psychiatry 1:368–76
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Mohr DC, Ho J, Hart TL, Baron KG, Berendsen M et al. 2014. Control condition design and implementation features in controlled trials: a meta-analysis of trials evaluating psychotherapy for depression. Transl. Behav. Med. 4:407–23
    [Google Scholar]
  75. Munder T, Brütsch O, Leonhart R, Gerger H, Barth J 2013. Researcher allegiance in psychotherapy outcome research: an overview of reviews. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 33:501–11
    [Google Scholar]
  76. Munder T, Gerger H, Trelle S, Barth J 2011. Testing the allegiance bias hypothesis: a meta-analysis. Psychother. Res. 21:670–84
    [Google Scholar]
  77. Norcross JC, Wampold BE 2011. Evidence-based therapy relationships: research conclusions and clinical practices. Psychotherapy 48:98–102
    [Google Scholar]
  78. Olatunji BO, Davis ML, Powers MB, Smits JA 2013. Cognitive-behavioral therapy for obsessive–compulsive disorder: a meta-analysis of treatment outcome and moderators. J. Psychiatr. Res. 47:33–41
    [Google Scholar]
  79. Orlinsky DE, Ronnestad MH, Willutzki U 2004. Fifty years of psychotherapy process–outcome research: continuity and change. Bergin and Garfield's Handbook of Psychotherapy and Behavior Change MJ Lambert 307–89 New York: Wiley
    [Google Scholar]
  80. Oud M, Mayo-Wilson E, Braidwood R, Schulte P, Jones SH et al. 2016. Psychological interventions for adults with bipolar disorder: systematic review and meta-analysis. Br. J. Psychiatry 208:213–22
    [Google Scholar]
  81. Pompoli A, Furukawa TA, Imai H, Tajika A, Efthimiou O, Salanti G 2018. Psychological therapies for panic disorder with or without agoraphobia in adults: a network meta-analysis. BJPsych Adv. 24:2
    [Google Scholar]
  82. Rosenzweig S 1936. Some implicit common factors in diverse methods of psychotherapy. Am. J. Orthopsychiatry 6:412–15
    [Google Scholar]
  83. Shinohara K, Honyashiki M, Imai H, Hunot V, Caldwell DM et al. 2013. Behavioural therapies versus other psychological therapies for depression. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 16:CD008696
    [Google Scholar]
  84. Skapinakis P, Caldwell DM, Hollingworth W, Bryden P, Fineberg NA et al. 2016. Pharmacological and psychotherapeutic interventions for management of obsessive–compulsive disorder in adults: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Lancet Psychiatry 3:730–39
    [Google Scholar]
  85. Slade E, Keeney E, Mavranezouli I, Dias S, Fou L et al. 2018. Treatments for bulimia nervosa: a network meta-analysis. Psychol. Med. 6:1–8
    [Google Scholar]
  86. Spinhoven P, Klein N, Kennis M, Cramer AO, Siegle G et al. 2018. The effects of cognitive-behavior therapy for depression on repetitive negative thinking: a meta-analysis. Behav. Res. Ther. 106:71–85
    [Google Scholar]
  87. Steinert C, Munder T, Rabung S, Hoyer J, Leichsenring F 2017. Psychodynamic therapy: as efficacious as other empirically supported treatments? A meta-analysis testing equivalence of outcomes. Am. J. Psychiatry 174:943–53
    [Google Scholar]
  88. Turner DT, van der Gaag M, Karyotaki E, Cuijpers P 2014. Psychological interventions for psychosis: a meta-analysis of comparative outcome studies. Am. J. Psychiatry 171:523–38
    [Google Scholar]
  89. Velthorst E, Koeter M, Van Der Gaag M, Nieman DH, Fett A-K et al. 2015. Adapted cognitive-behavioural therapy required for targeting negative symptoms in schizophrenia: meta-analysis and meta-regression. Psychol. Med. 45:453–65
    [Google Scholar]
  90. Wampold BE 2001. The Great Psychotherapy Debate: Models, Methods, and Findings Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
  91. Wampold BE 2015. How important are the common factors in psychotherapy? An update. World Psychiatry 14:270–77
    [Google Scholar]
  92. Wampold BE, Imel ZE 2015. Great Psychotherapy Debate: The Evidence for What Makes Psychotherapy Work New York: Routledge. , 2nd ed..
  93. Wampold BE, Minami T, Baskin TW, Callen Tierney S 2002. A meta-(re)analysis of the effects of cognitive therapy versus “other therapies” for depression. J. Affect. Disord. 68:159–65
    [Google Scholar]
  94. Wampold BE, Mondin GW, Moody M, Stich F, Benson K, Ahn H 1997. A meta-analysis of outcome studies comparing bona fide psychotherapies: empirically, “all must have prizes. .” Psychol. Bull. 122:203–15
    [Google Scholar]
  95. Westen D, Novotny CM, Thompson-Brenner H 2004. The empirical status of empirically supported psychotherapies: assumptions, findings, and reporting in controlled clinical trials. Psychol. Bull. 130:631–71
    [Google Scholar]
  96. Zilcha-Mano S 2017. Is the alliance really therapeutic? Revisiting this question in light of recent methodological advances. Am. Psychol. 72:311–25
    [Google Scholar]
  97. Zilcha-Mano S, Lipsitz I, Errázuriz P 2018. When is it effective to focus on the alliance? Analysis of a within-client moderator. Cogn. Ther. Res. 42:159–71
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-050718-095424
Loading
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-050718-095424
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error