What works in the Socratic debate? An analysis of verbal behaviour interaction during cognitive restructuring

Abstract

Background: Cognitive restructuring is one of the most complex application procedures in psychotherapy. It is widely used by psychologists from different orientations. However, the guidelines on how to apply it do not usually have empirical evidence and there is a lack of knowledge about the mechanisms of change that explain it. Aims: The analysis of verbalizations that therapists emit during the Socratic method could help to better understand the functioning and strategies of effective debates. Method: In this study, specific verbal interaction sequences were analysed using observational methodology. The sample consisted of 113 Socratic questioning fragments belonging to 18 clinical cases, treated by behavioural therapists. Results: Among other findings, it was found that using questioning together with certain previous verbalizations directed the client’s response more effectively and those successful debates were characterized by using the aversive component in a frequent and contingent way. Conclusion: This study shows the most effective way to establish such an interaction in the Socratic method (following a style closer to Ellis’s argumentative debate), which entails relevant practical applications in therapy.