Frank has argued that therapy outcome depends more on client and therapist characteristics than on therapeutic methods. Based on this assertion, Frank has suggested that researchers should direct their attention to the identification of relevant client and therapist characteristics. The aim of this article is to challenge Frank's argument and to offer an alternative direction for clinical researchers that emphasizes the development of more potent psychological procedures. Frank (1979) has recently given a rather pessimistic view of the current state of knowledge regarding the effectiveness of psychological interventions. He offers several generalizations to summarize the findings of past therapy outcome research: (a) All forms of psychotherapy are somewhat more effective than informal or unplanned help; (b) one form of therapy has rarely been shown to be significantly more effective than any other; (c) most clients who show initial improvement maintain it; and (d) therapeutic success lies more in the qualities of the client, therapist, and their interaction than in the therapeutic method. Frank argues that since therapeutic success depends primarily on client and therapist characteristics, clinical researchers should direct their attention to the identification of relevant attributes of clients and therapists. He suggests that future research explore the relationship between client characteristics (e.g., locus of control), therapist characteristics (e.g., degree of therapist participation), and therapy outcome.The directions for future research suggested by Frank are based on several erroneous generalizations regarding the present state of knowledge on psychological change. The aim of the present article is to challenge Frank's original generalizations and to offer an alternative direction for clinical researchers.To support the generalization that therapies rarely differ in effectiveness, Frank cites two widely publicized articles on psychotherapy outcome (Sloane, Staples, Cristol, Yorkston, &