Click here to download

Cognitive Psychotherapy. Which kind of integration is possible?
Journal Title: QUADERNI DI PSICOTERAPIA COGNITIVA 
Author/s: Hèctor Férnandez Alvarez 
Year:  2013 Issue: 33 Language: Italian 
Pages:  10 Pg. 9-18 FullText PDF:  119 KB
DOI:  10.3280/QPC2013-033002
(DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation:  clicca qui   and here 


In this article is shown a re-riding of the historical path of psychology and cognitive psychotherapy. Cognitive psychotherapy is a field with several components, particularly fragmented and characterized by a wide multiplicity of aspects. Discussing if integration is possible it at first requires the comprehension of the differences and, most of all, the origins of these differences. The aim of this work is to give a referential context that allows to understand on which basis is nowadays possible to think about different models’ integration. The interesting perspective might be that to apply to cognitive therapy those lines which have dominated the more general integration field. We have identified four main lines: a) common factors; b) technical eclecticism; c) integrative assimilation; d) theoretical integration.
Keywords: Cognitive psychotherapy, integration.

  1. Adams F., Aizawa K. (2008). The bounds of cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.
  2. David D., Hofmann S.G. (2013). Another error of Descartes? Implications for the “third wave” cognitive-behavioral therapy. Journal of Cognitive and Behavioral Psychotherapies. 13 (1): 115-124.
  3. Gelso C. (2011). Emerging and continuing trends in psychotherapy. Psychotherapy, 48 (2): 182-187., 10.1037/a002344DOI: 10.1037/a002344
  4. Hayes S. (2012). Humanistic psychology and contextual behavioral perspectives. Psychotherapy, 49 (4): 455-460., 10.1037/a0027396HofmannS.G.,AsnaaniA.,VonkJ.J.,SawyerA.T.,FangA.(2012).Theefficacyofcognitivebehavioraltherapy:areviewofmeta-analyses.Cognit.Ther.Res.,36(5):427-440.doi:10.1007/s10608-012-9476-DOI: 10.1037/a0027396HofmannS.G.,AsnaaniA.,VonkJ.J.,SawyerA.T.,FangA.(2012).Theefficacyofcognitivebehavioraltherapy:areviewofmeta-analyses.Cognit.Ther.Res.,36(5):427-440.doi:10.1007/s10608-012-9476-
  5. Mahoney M., Gabriel T.J. (1987). Psychotherapy and cognitive sciences: an evolving alliance. Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy, 1 (1): 60. Osbeck L. (2009). Transformations in Cognitive Science: Implications and Issus Posed. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 29 (1): 16-33.
  6. Pacciolla A., Mancini F., editors (2010). Cognitivismo esistenziale. Del significato del sintomo al significato della vita. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  7. Paris J. (2013). How the history of psychotherapy interferes with integration. Journal of Psychotherapy Integration, 23 (2): 99-106.
  8. Rapaport D. (1967). La estructura de la teoría psicoanalítica. Buenos Aires: Paidós (version original: The Structure of Psychoanalytic Theory, 1960, New York: Int. Univ. Press).
  9. Sembrano A.G. (2010). Possibili integrazioni con el cognitivismo. In Pacciolla A., Mancini F., Cognitivismo esistenziale, Milano: FrancoAngeli, pp. 21-47.
  10. Young J.E., Klosko J.W, Weishaar M.E. (2003). Schema Therapy: A Practitioner’s Guide. New York: Guilford Press.

Hèctor Férnandez Alvarez, Cognitive Psychotherapy. Which kind of integration is possible? in "QUADERNI DI PSICOTERAPIA COGNITIVA" 33/2013, pp. 9-18, DOI:10.3280/QPC2013-033002

   

FrancoAngeli is a member of Publishers International Linking Association a not for profit orgasnization wich runs the CrossRef service, enabing links to and from online scholarly content