Click on the following links. Please note these will open in a new window

Article 1: Rhodes, P. (October 2012). Why clinical psychology needs process research: An examination of four methodologies. Clinical child psychology and psychiatry, 17(4), 495-504.

Abstract: This paper advocates for process research as a valid source of evidence in clinical psychology, research that focuses on why and how therapy works, both across the course of treatment and in the minutiae of interactions between therapist and client. Process research is consistent with the aims of the scientist-practitioner model, supporting the provision of practical and realistic guidance to clinicians. Specific examples of methods are provided, including the analysis of mechanisms of change, patient-focused research, conversational analysis and interpersonal process recall.

Questions that apply to this article:

1. In your opinion, why is it important for clinical psychologists to also conduct research? .
    

Article 2: Horneland, M., Børnes, D.S., ]Høbye, K., Knutsen, H., & Lorentzen, S. (March 2012). Can the Clinician–Researcher Gap be Bridged? Experiences from a Randomized Clinical Trial in Analytic/Dynamic Group Psychotherapy. Group analysis, 45(1), 84-98.

Abstract: This article describes how four seasoned clinicians and group analysts working in public mental health services, experience their participation in a randomized trial of short-term versus long-term analytic group psychotherapy (20 or 80 sessions). The design makes it possible to integrate the research with regular clinical practice, and participation gives the institutions the opportunity to fulfil obligations of doing research, that are imposed on the Community Mental Health Centres. The experiences are mainly described from the clinicians’ position, but some comments from the research director are included. The collaboration across approximately five years is found to be interesting and rewarding. Based on the assumption that further steps are made to strengthen and develop the qualitative aspects of such projects, the clinicians recommend such collaboration as a feasible and useful way to build and maintain a bridge across the gap that too often seems to separate researchers and clinicians. This is assumed to be profitable for everyone involved, not least the patients.