Building a firm foundation in play therapy research: Response to Phillips (2010).

Abstract

This article is a response to Phillips's (2010) article titled "How Firm Is Our Foundation? Current Play Therapy Research." Strengths of Phillips's article are identified as (a) recognition of evidence-based standards in scientific literature, (b) challenge for methodologically sound studies, and (c) clear recommendations for future research. Responses to his concerns were addressed by (a) identifying credible scientific evidence of recent play therapy research studies, (b) providing a balanced interpretation of Bratton, Ray, Rhine, and Jones's (2005) metaanalysis, and (c) replying to metaquestions in play therapy research. The authors conclude that play therapy researchers have made steady progress in building a firm foundation of play therapy research and continue to do so.

A Meta‐Analytic Review of Child‐Centered Play Therapy Approaches

“…Counseling professionals are ethically responsible for providing interventions based on empirical evidence (American Counseling Association, ). With studies dating back to the early 1940s, CCPT has one of the longest histories of intervention research in the field of child counseling (Baggerly, Ray, & Bratton, ). In intervention research, the statistically significant superiority of the experimental condition in comparison with a no‐treatment, alternative‐treatment, or placebo condition is considered an important criterion for evidence of treatment effect (Nezu & Nezu, ).…”

“…Baggerly and Bratton () and Ray and Bratton () reviewed outcome studies of CCPT in the present decade, noting a surge in well‐designed and methodologically rigorous research. The purpose of the present meta‐analysis was to examine a single theoretical modality by investigating the effects of play therapy based on contemporary studies following a CCPT methodology.…”

Play Therapy Research: Issues for 21st Century Progress

“…Therefore, change models must also be articulated for each type of play-based treatment (e.g., child-centered, Adlerian, or cognitive behavioral). For example, the humanistic therapist must decipher whether the relationship, the play, or some combination of both produces the therapeutic change (Baggerly & Bratton, 2010). Similarly, the CBT play therapist treating a traumatized child must discern whether it is the exposure-based emotional processing of the traumatic event, the play, the caregiver collateral sessions, or a combination that produces the therapeutic gain.…”

“…It is difficult to draw conclusions from the meta-analytic findings without a coding system for study quality (Phillips, 2010). Baggerly and Bratton (2010) addressed this omission and acknowledged concerns related to study quality. They explained that many of the criteria considered in assessing study quality today (e.g., use of treatment protocols and measuring adherence to protocol) were not standard procedure in research until the later 1990s.…”

“…Nevertheless, there is now a more firmly developed research base, a wave of emerging rigorous research, and, perhaps most importantly, greater consensus to move toward the use of mainstream research practices. Numerous authors now agree that highly powered RCTs, as well as process-focused research is needed (Baggerly, 2010;Baggerly & Bratton, 2010;Drewes, 2011;Schaefer & Drewes, 2009).…”