Publication details
Alternative psychotherapies: What do we know about them?
| Authors | |
|---|---|
| Year of publication | 2010 |
| Type | Appeared in Conference without Proceedings |
| MU Faculty or unit | |
| Citation | |
| Description | Aim: In a former study we have created a scientific list of recognized psychotherapeutic approaches based on transparent criteria of choice and we have repeatedly faced a question of how to cope with so called alternative psychotherapies (fringe, complementary, potentially harmful). The goal of this study is to define in what way the premises of alternative approaches are different from the acknowledged psychotherapies. Our attempt is to set clear criteria for identifying alternative psychotherapies, based on (1) experts’ critiques and opinions (Lilienfeld, Beyerstein, Ellis, etc.), on (2) ethical codes of core psychotherapeutic associations (EAP, APA, etc.) and (3) an analysis of what these therapies lack in contrast with common features of widely accepted traditional approaches. The next stage of the study is qualitative validation of the results by experts: (1) scientists specialized in psychotherapeutic systems or alternative psychotherapy and (2) leading figures in the field of alternative psychotherapy. Method: Based on data derived from relevant literature, the analysis’ aim is to create a system of criteria able to qualify a psychotherapeutic modality as alternative and illustrate the criteria with examples from psychotherapeutic practice. Second part of the work is based on validation of the model by experts (see Aim) mainly in the local context (Czech Republic). Results: The result of the study is a set of criteria meant to identify alternative psychotherapeutic modalities, validated by experts. Discussion: Findings will be discussed with respect to recent literature in the field and to their practical implications. Keywords: Alternative psychotherapies, Fringe psychotherapies, Complementary psychotherapies |