Critical aspects of the therapeutic alliance appear to be established as early as the first session. Specifically, the affective bond between the therapeutic dyad appears to develop early in treatment and tends to remain stable over time, while agreements on goals and tasks tend to fluctuate over the course of treatment. Are there distinguishable early signs of a strong therapeutic alliance? In this study, we examined how some linguistic measures indicative of joint emotional elaboration correlated with a measure of the therapeutic alliance assessed within a single session. Initial intake sessions with 40 patients with varying diagnoses were videotaped, transcribed, and analyzed using linguistic measures of referential process and then scored with the Segmented Working Alliance Inventory-Observer form. Results showed that patients who were rated as more emotionally engaged in relating their experiences and then reflecting on them by mid-session also had higher scores in the therapeutic alliance by the final part of that same session. An implication of this study is that the interpersonal factors facilitating elaboration of inner experience, including elements of warmth, safety, and analytic trust, are related to the development of early therapeutic alliance. These findings did not appear to be dependent on the patient’s psychopathology. This study is one in a growing line of research exploring how patients speak rather than just the content of what they say.

No abstract

No abstract

Systemic therapists assume, but have not yet proved that ordinary people: (i) normally do not use triadic thinking and (ii) are able, thanks to therapists' interviewing techniques, to construct triadic explanations. To test these assumptions this study analyses the explanations provided by 400 undergraduates of an unexpected piece of behaviour framed in four stimulus situations where the breadth of the observation field was manipulated. The results show that triadic explanations are unusual and increase with the widening of the field of observation from the monad to the triad. It is the 'enigmatic' triadic situation -adding a puzzling discrepancy between the actors' forms of behaviour -that elicits more triadic explanations. This suggests that therapists should explore with clients the contradictions disclosed by the widening of the field of observation and support reframings actively co-constructed with them instead of 'pre-packaged' ones.

This study tested an expanded version of the explanatory model of the negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health proposed by Milman and colleagues. Participants (N = 680) completed an online survey on demographic variables associated with poor pandemic mental health, COVID-19 stressors, mental health symptoms, and pandemic-related psychological processes we hypothesized as mediating mechanisms explaining the negative mental health effects of the COVID-19 stressors. Results indicated that these psychological processes (core belief violation, meaning made of the pandemic, vulnerability, and mortality perception) explained the severity of mental health symptoms to a far greater extent than COVID-19 stressors and demographics combined. In addition, these psychological processes mediated the impact of COVID-19 stressors on all mental health outcomes. Specifically, COVID-19 stressors were associated with increased core belief violation, decreased meaning making, and more intense perceived vulnerability and mortality. In turn, those whose core beliefs were more violated by the pandemic, who made less meaning of the pandemic, and who perceived a more pronounced vulnerability and mortality experienced a worse mental health condition. This study’s results suggest some possible ways of intervention in pandemic-like events useful for limiting such impact at the individual, group, social and political levels.