![[Valid RSS]](images/valid-rss-rogers.png "Valid RSS")
This is a valid RSS feed.
This feed is valid, but interoperability with the widest range of feed readers could be improved by implementing the following recommendations.
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"> <channel> <title><![CDATA[Online First Publication: Journal of Psychotherapy Integration]]></title> <description><![CDATA[Journal of Psychotherapy Integration is the official journal of SEPI, the Society for the Exploration of Psychotherapy Integration. The journal is devoted to publishing original peer-reviewed papers that move beyond the confines of single-school or single-theory approaches to psychotherapy and behavior change, and that significantly advance our knoweldge of psychotherapy integration. The journal publishes papers presenting new data, theory, or clinical techniques relevant to psychotherapy integration, as well as papers that review existing work in the area.]]></description> <link>https://psycnet.apa.org</link>  <generator>APA PsycNET</generator> <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Jul 2025 06:09:41 GMT</lastBuildDate> <atom:link href="https://psycnet.apa.org/PsycARTICLES/journal/int" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/> <copyright><![CDATA[Copyright 2025 American Psychological Association]]></copyright> <language><![CDATA[en-us]]></language> <item> <title><![CDATA[Alliance rupture–repair and treatment outcome in youth psychotherapy: A systematic review.]]></title> <description><![CDATA[While extensive research has investigated alliance rupture–repair processes in adult psychotherapy, there is a need for a better understanding of rupture–repair and its association with outcome in child and adolescent psychotherapy. This study aims to fill this gap and provide the first systematic narrative synthesis of the existing empirical research on the association between alliance rupture–repair processes and therapeutic outcomes among adolescents. This systematic review included six studies. The findings from these studies indicate that successful rupture–repair processes are associated with improved therapeutic outcomes and reduced dropout rates. These results should be interpreted with caution because of the limited number of studies, small sample sizes, methodological limitations, and observed heterogeneity. This review also highlights a significant research gap in child therapy on this topic. Despite these limitations, it underscores the association between successful rupture–repair and improved therapeutic outcomes and treatment retention, particularly in adolescent psychotherapy. Further research, especially in child therapy, is essential to deepen our understanding of this relationship. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved)]]></description> <guid isPermaLink="false">https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2026-34455-001</guid> <pubDate>Mon, 30 Jun 2025 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate> <dc:title>Alliance rupture–repair and treatment outcome in youth psychotherapy: A systematic review.</dc:title> <dc:description><![CDATA[While extensive research has investigated alliance rupture–repair processes in adult psychotherapy, there is a need for a better understanding of rupture–repair and its association with outcome in child and adolescent psychotherapy. This study aims to fill this gap and provide the first systematic narrative synthesis of the existing empirical research on the association between alliance rupture–repair processes and therapeutic outcomes among adolescents. This systematic review included six studies. The findings from these studies indicate that successful rupture–repair processes are associated with improved therapeutic outcomes and reduced dropout rates. These results should be interpreted with caution because of the limited number of studies, small sample sizes, methodological limitations, and observed heterogeneity. This review also highlights a significant research gap in child therapy on this topic. Despite these limitations, it underscores the association between successful rupture–repair and improved therapeutic outcomes and treatment retention, particularly in adolescent psychotherapy. Further research, especially in child therapy, is essential to deepen our understanding of this relationship. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved)]]></dc:description> <dc:identifier>10.1037/int0000369</dc:identifier> <dc:type>Journal Article</dc:type> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Journal of Psychotherapy Integration, Jun 30, 2025, No Pagination Specified; <a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2026-34455-001">doi:10.1037/int0000369</a></p>While extensive research has investigated alliance rupture–repair processes in adult psychotherapy, there is a need for a better understanding of rupture–repair and its association with outcome in child and adolescent psychotherapy. This study aims to fill this gap and provide the first systematic narrative synthesis of the existing empirical research on the association between alliance rupture–repair processes and therapeutic outcomes among adolescents. This systematic review included six studies. The findings from these studies indicate that successful rupture–repair processes are associated with improved therapeutic outcomes and reduced dropout rates. These results should be interpreted with caution because of the limited number of studies, small sample sizes, methodological limitations, and observed heterogeneity. This review also highlights a significant research gap in child therapy on this topic. Despite these limitations, it underscores the association between successful rupture–repair and improved therapeutic outcomes and treatment retention, particularly in adolescent psychotherapy. Further research, especially in child therapy, is essential to deepen our understanding of this relationship. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved) ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item> <title><![CDATA[An integral analysis of the etiology and treatment of substance use disorders.]]></title> <description><![CDATA[A fundamental obstacle in formulating integrated, unified approaches to the treatment of any complex mental disorder is understanding the many factors involved in its etiology, and how they interact in any given individual. In addition, understanding the full scope of the etiological pathways and related treatment options for complex disorders, such as substance use disorders, is complicated by the epistemological assumptions and methodological practices across different research and clinical traditions. These varied perspectives—from behaviorism, neuroscience, cognitive, psychodynamic and affective to family systems, public policy, and sociocultural dynamics—have each produced fragmented understandings of different components of most disorders. Using the four-quadrant model of integral theory, the present article aims to integrate across the approaches involved in researching, diagnosing, and treating substance use disorders in order to produce a unified understanding of its etiological processes, the links among them, and how such a conceptualization is associated with similarly integrated options for treatment. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved)]]></description> <guid isPermaLink="false">https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2025-87876-001</guid> <pubDate>Mon, 03 Mar 2025 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate> <dc:title>An integral analysis of the etiology and treatment of substance use disorders.</dc:title> <dc:description><![CDATA[A fundamental obstacle in formulating integrated, unified approaches to the treatment of any complex mental disorder is understanding the many factors involved in its etiology, and how they interact in any given individual. In addition, understanding the full scope of the etiological pathways and related treatment options for complex disorders, such as substance use disorders, is complicated by the epistemological assumptions and methodological practices across different research and clinical traditions. These varied perspectives—from behaviorism, neuroscience, cognitive, psychodynamic and affective to family systems, public policy, and sociocultural dynamics—have each produced fragmented understandings of different components of most disorders. Using the four-quadrant model of integral theory, the present article aims to integrate across the approaches involved in researching, diagnosing, and treating substance use disorders in order to produce a unified understanding of its etiological processes, the links among them, and how such a conceptualization is associated with similarly integrated options for treatment. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved)]]></dc:description> <dc:identifier>10.1037/int0000360</dc:identifier> <dc:type>Journal Article</dc:type> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Journal of Psychotherapy Integration, Mar 03, 2025, No Pagination Specified; <a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2025-87876-001">doi:10.1037/int0000360</a></p>A fundamental obstacle in formulating integrated, unified approaches to the treatment of any complex mental disorder is understanding the many factors involved in its etiology, and how they interact in any given individual. In addition, understanding the full scope of the etiological pathways and related treatment options for complex disorders, such as substance use disorders, is complicated by the epistemological assumptions and methodological practices across different research and clinical traditions. These varied perspectives—from behaviorism, neuroscience, cognitive, psychodynamic and affective to family systems, public policy, and sociocultural dynamics—have each produced fragmented understandings of different components of most disorders. Using the four-quadrant model of integral theory, the present article aims to integrate across the approaches involved in researching, diagnosing, and treating substance use disorders in order to produce a unified understanding of its etiological processes, the links among them, and how such a conceptualization is associated with similarly integrated options for treatment. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved) ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item> <title><![CDATA[A meta-analysis of client–therapist perspectives on the therapeutic alliance: Examining the moderating role of eating disorders versus anxiety disorders, treatment orientation, and measurement time points.]]></title> <description><![CDATA[Objective: The effectiveness of therapy is correlated with the therapeutic alliance (TA) rating congruence between clients and therapists. The current meta-analysis seeks to determine how clients with eating disorders versus anxiety disorders and their therapists differ in their assessments of the TA. This investigation focuses on two potential moderators: treatment orientation, and measurement time points. Method: Three electronic databases were searched, and a total of 2,688 articles were identified using a combination of search terms. 40 studies (<em>N</em> = 2,727) met the inclusion criteria. Data were coded, and a risk of bias assessment was conducted for each included study. We then analyzed the data using multivariate random effects models. Moderation analyses were conducted with a series of univariate metaregressions. Results: The overall mean therapist–client discrepancy in TA was moderate in size, with clients typically having a higher evaluation, <em>g</em> = 0.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.28, 0.53], SE = 0.06. Furthermore, the effect size for eating disorders samples (<em>g</em> = 0.51, 95% CI [0.31, 0.71], <em>SE</em> = 0.09) was descriptively larger than anxiety disorders samples (<em>g</em> = 0.37, 95% CI [0.21, 0.53], <em>SE</em> = 0.08), but moderation analysis did not reveal any significant moderators of the therapist–client discrepancy in TA assessment. Conclusion: Our analysis shows that therapist–client discrepancy in TA assessment is robust. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved)]]></description> <guid isPermaLink="false">https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2025-82230-001</guid> <pubDate>Mon, 17 Feb 2025 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate> <dc:title>A meta-analysis of client–therapist perspectives on the therapeutic alliance: Examining the moderating role of eating disorders versus anxiety disorders, treatment orientation, and measurement time points.</dc:title> <dc:description><![CDATA[Objective: The effectiveness of therapy is correlated with the therapeutic alliance (TA) rating congruence between clients and therapists. The current meta-analysis seeks to determine how clients with eating disorders versus anxiety disorders and their therapists differ in their assessments of the TA. This investigation focuses on two potential moderators: treatment orientation, and measurement time points. Method: Three electronic databases were searched, and a total of 2,688 articles were identified using a combination of search terms. 40 studies (<em>N</em> = 2,727) met the inclusion criteria. Data were coded, and a risk of bias assessment was conducted for each included study. We then analyzed the data using multivariate random effects models. Moderation analyses were conducted with a series of univariate metaregressions. Results: The overall mean therapist–client discrepancy in TA was moderate in size, with clients typically having a higher evaluation, <em>g</em> = 0.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.28, 0.53], SE = 0.06. Furthermore, the effect size for eating disorders samples (<em>g</em> = 0.51, 95% CI [0.31, 0.71], <em>SE</em> = 0.09) was descriptively larger than anxiety disorders samples (<em>g</em> = 0.37, 95% CI [0.21, 0.53], <em>SE</em> = 0.08), but moderation analysis did not reveal any significant moderators of the therapist–client discrepancy in TA assessment. Conclusion: Our analysis shows that therapist–client discrepancy in TA assessment is robust. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved)]]></dc:description> <dc:identifier>10.1037/int0000355</dc:identifier> <dc:type>Journal Article</dc:type> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Journal of Psychotherapy Integration, Feb 17, 2025, No Pagination Specified; <a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2025-82230-001">doi:10.1037/int0000355</a></p>Objective: The effectiveness of therapy is correlated with the therapeutic alliance (TA) rating congruence between clients and therapists. The current meta-analysis seeks to determine how clients with eating disorders versus anxiety disorders and their therapists differ in their assessments of the TA. This investigation focuses on two potential moderators: treatment orientation, and measurement time points. Method: Three electronic databases were searched, and a total of 2,688 articles were identified using a combination of search terms. 40 studies (<em>N</em> = 2,727) met the inclusion criteria. Data were coded, and a risk of bias assessment was conducted for each included study. We then analyzed the data using multivariate random effects models. Moderation analyses were conducted with a series of univariate metaregressions. Results: The overall mean therapist–client discrepancy in TA was moderate in size, with clients typically having a higher evaluation, <em>g</em> = 0.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.28, 0.53], SE = 0.06. Furthermore, the effect size for eating disorders samples (<em>g</em> = 0.51, 95% CI [0.31, 0.71], <em>SE</em> = 0.09) was descriptively larger than anxiety disorders samples (<em>g</em> = 0.37, 95% CI [0.21, 0.53], <em>SE</em> = 0.08), but moderation analysis did not reveal any significant moderators of the therapist–client discrepancy in TA assessment. Conclusion: Our analysis shows that therapist–client discrepancy in TA assessment is robust. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved) ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item> <title><![CDATA[From a latent variable to a complex dynamic system conceptualization of the therapeutic alliance.]]></title> <description><![CDATA[The aim of this study was to develop a complex dynamic system (CDS) model of the therapeutic alliance and compare it to the currently dominant latent state–trait (LST) model. A clinical example of a state of alliance rupture and repair is analyzed in terms of a LST model and a CDS model. Then, the implications of these two models in their application to clinical research and practice are compared. Adopting a CDS perspective offers significant advantages over the LST approach. Specifically, it provides stronger clinical face validity, aligns with Bordin’s (1979) conceptualization of the alliance, accounts for the interaction of state and trait alliance, and assures conceptual independence between causal entities. By examining the interactions among observable reactions, the coordination of these reactions into patterns that form alliance states, and how iterative state changes reshape the trait alliance landscape of attractor states, the CDS perspective offers actionable clinical recommendations across all three levels. However, CDS and LST hybrid theories are possible and may have merit. The CDS perspective provides a holistic approach that requires a specification of all influential components of the target system—the disorder addressed—and of the therapy system—the extended system of therapeutic components. It leads to a research program for developing models of therapeutic systems case by case using qualitative and quantitative methods. It also provides precise tests of complete models, including comparison of mathematically derived simulations to real-world data and empirical testing by newly developed network analytic methods. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved)]]></description> <guid isPermaLink="false">https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2025-75991-001</guid> <pubDate>Mon, 03 Feb 2025 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate> <dc:title>From a latent variable to a complex dynamic system conceptualization of the therapeutic alliance.</dc:title> <dc:description><![CDATA[The aim of this study was to develop a complex dynamic system (CDS) model of the therapeutic alliance and compare it to the currently dominant latent state–trait (LST) model. A clinical example of a state of alliance rupture and repair is analyzed in terms of a LST model and a CDS model. Then, the implications of these two models in their application to clinical research and practice are compared. Adopting a CDS perspective offers significant advantages over the LST approach. Specifically, it provides stronger clinical face validity, aligns with Bordin’s (1979) conceptualization of the alliance, accounts for the interaction of state and trait alliance, and assures conceptual independence between causal entities. By examining the interactions among observable reactions, the coordination of these reactions into patterns that form alliance states, and how iterative state changes reshape the trait alliance landscape of attractor states, the CDS perspective offers actionable clinical recommendations across all three levels. However, CDS and LST hybrid theories are possible and may have merit. The CDS perspective provides a holistic approach that requires a specification of all influential components of the target system—the disorder addressed—and of the therapy system—the extended system of therapeutic components. It leads to a research program for developing models of therapeutic systems case by case using qualitative and quantitative methods. It also provides precise tests of complete models, including comparison of mathematically derived simulations to real-world data and empirical testing by newly developed network analytic methods. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved)]]></dc:description> <dc:identifier>10.1037/int0000357</dc:identifier> <dc:type>Journal Article</dc:type> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Journal of Psychotherapy Integration, Feb 03, 2025, No Pagination Specified; <a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2025-75991-001">doi:10.1037/int0000357</a></p>The aim of this study was to develop a complex dynamic system (CDS) model of the therapeutic alliance and compare it to the currently dominant latent state–trait (LST) model. A clinical example of a state of alliance rupture and repair is analyzed in terms of a LST model and a CDS model. Then, the implications of these two models in their application to clinical research and practice are compared. Adopting a CDS perspective offers significant advantages over the LST approach. Specifically, it provides stronger clinical face validity, aligns with Bordin’s (1979) conceptualization of the alliance, accounts for the interaction of state and trait alliance, and assures conceptual independence between causal entities. By examining the interactions among observable reactions, the coordination of these reactions into patterns that form alliance states, and how iterative state changes reshape the trait alliance landscape of attractor states, the CDS perspective offers actionable clinical recommendations across all three levels. However, CDS and LST hybrid theories are possible and may have merit. The CDS perspective provides a holistic approach that requires a specification of all influential components of the target system—the disorder addressed—and of the therapy system—the extended system of therapeutic components. It leads to a research program for developing models of therapeutic systems case by case using qualitative and quantitative methods. It also provides precise tests of complete models, including comparison of mathematically derived simulations to real-world data and empirical testing by newly developed network analytic methods. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved) ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel></rss>If you would like to create a banner that links to this page (i.e. this validation result), do the following:
Download the "valid RSS" banner.
Upload the image to your own server. (This step is important. Please do not link directly to the image on this server.)
Add this HTML to your page (change the image src attribute if necessary):
If you would like to create a text link instead, here is the URL you can use:
http://www.feedvalidator.org/check.cgi?url=https%3A//content.apa.org/journals/int-ofp.rss
