Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Quaderni di Psicoterapia Cognitiva - Open Access

Studies and researches

No. 45 (2019)

The therapeutic relationship in Metacognitive Interpersonal Therapy

Submitted
dicembre 31, 2019
Published
2019-12-31

Abstract

Research shows that the therapeutic relationship and treatment outcome are related. Attention to the therapeutic relationship is one of the cornerstones of Metacognitive Interpersonal Therapy (MIT). In this paper we first summarize the core element of the approach, and then describe how the work through the therapeutic relationship is intertwined with the use of experiential techniques, such as guided imagery and rescripting and role-play, which are aimed at promoting better understanding of patients’ inner world and at promoting change.
We will provide clinical examples in order to describe how the relationship at the same time is: 1) an instrument to foster access to inner states; 2) an instrument to generate corrective emotional experiences. For example, in many cases using an experiential technique makes the patients get in touch with healthy self-aspects and so they experiment how relationships sustain autonomy and hope; 3) an object of intervention in case of alliance ruptures, also when they follow the use of some experiential technique.
Overall, we will show how in MIT therapy change is fostered by the clinician’s ability to move smoothly between using techniques aimed at exploration and change and a focus on the relationship.

References

  1. Ain S., Gelso C.J. (2008). Chipping away at the blank screen: Self-disclosure, the real relationship, and therapy outcome. Psychotherapy Research, 22(3).
  2. Alexander F., French T.M. (1946). Psychoanalytic therapy. New York: Ronald Press.
  3. Bromberg P.M. (1998). Standing in the spaces: Essays on clinical process, trauma, and dissociation. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Analytic Press.
  4. Clark A. (1997). Being There: Putting Brain, Body, and World Together Again. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  5. Dimaggio G., Lysaker P.H. (a cura di) (2010). Metacognition and severe adult mental disorders: from Research to treatment. London: Routledge.
  6. Dimaggio G., Montano A., Popolo R., Salvatore G. (2013). Terapia metacognitiva interpersonale dei disturbi di personalità. Milano: Raffaello Cortina.
  7. Dimaggio G., Ottavi P., Popolo R., Salvatore G. (2019). Corpo, immaginazione e cambiamento: Terapia metacognitiva interpersonale. Milano: Raffaello Cortina.
  8. Dimaggio G., Salvatore G., Azzara C., Catania D., Semerari A., Hermans H.J. (2003). Dialogical relationships in impoverished narratives: from theory to clinical practice. Psychology and Psychotherapy. Theory Research and Practice, 76, 4: 385-409. doi: 10.1348/147608303770584746.
  9. Dimaggio G., Salvatore G., Fiore D., Carcione A., Nicolò G., Semerari A. (2012). General principles for treating personality disorder with a prominent inhibitedness trait: towards an operationalizing integrated technique. Journal of Personality Disorders, 26, 1: 63-83. doi: 10.1521/pedi.2012.26.1.63.
  10. Dimaggio G., Semerari A., Carcione A., Nicolò G., Procacci M. (2007). Psychotherapy of Personality Disorders. Metacognition, State of mind and interpersonal cycles. London: Routledge.
  11. Flückiger C., Del Re A.C., Wampold B.E., Symonds D., Horvath A.O. (2012). How central is the alliance in psychotherapy? A multilevel longitudinal meta-analysis. Journal Counseling Psychology, 59, 1: 10-7. doi: 10.1037/a0025749.
  12. Gazzillo F. (2016). Fidarsi dei pazienti. Introduzione alla Control-Mastery Theory. Milano: Raffaello Cortina.
  13. Gazzillo F., Dimaggio G., Curtis J.T. (2019). Case formulation and treatment planning: how to take care of relationship and symptoms together. Journal of Psychotherapy Integration. doi: 10.1037/int0000185.
  14. Gelso C.J. (2011). The real relationship in psychotherapy: the hidden foundation of change. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. doi: 10.1037/12349-000.
  15. Gelso C. (2014). A tripartite model of the therapeutic relationship: theory, research, and practice. Psychotherapy Research, 24, 2: 117-31. doi: 10.1080/10503307.2013.845920.
  16. Gelso C.J., Palma B. (2011). Directions for research on self-disclosure and immediacy: Moderation, mediation and the inverted U. Psychotherapy, 48: 342-348. doi: 10.1037/a00 25909.
  17. Hasson-Ohayon I. (2012). Integrating cognitive behavioral-based therapy with an
  18. intersubjective approach: Addressing metacognitive deficits among people with Schizophrenia. Journal of Psychotherapy Integration, 22, 4: 356-374. doi: 10.1037/a0029576.
  19. Horvath P. (2006). Controlling. München: Verlag Vahlen.
  20. Hill C.E., Knox S. (2009). Processing the therapeutic relationship. Psychoterapy Research, 19, 1: 13-29. doi: 10.1080/10503300802621206.
  21. Høglend P., Hersoug A.G., Bøgwald K.P., Amlo S., Marmo A., Sørbye Ø., Røssberg J.I., Ulberg R., Gabbard G.O., Crits-Christoph P. (2011). Effects of transference work in the context of therapeutic alliance and quality of object relations. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 79, 5: 697-706. doi: 10.1037/a0024863.
  22. Horvath A.O., Del Re A.C., Flückiger C., Symonds D. (2011). Alliance in individual psychotherapy. Psychotherapy (Chic), 48, 1: 9-16. doi: 10.1037/a0022186.
  23. Kiesler D.J. (1988). Therapeutic metacommunication: Therapist impact disclosure as feedback in psychotherapy. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
  24. Lambert M.J., Ogles B.M. (2004). Common factors: Post hoc explanation or empirically based therapy approach. Psychotherapy, 51: 500-504. doi: 10.1037/a0036580.
  25. Luborsky L., Crits-Christoph P. (1990). Understanding transference: The core conflictual relationship theme method. New York: Basic Books.
  26. Mander J., Neubauer A.B., Schlarb A., Teufel M., Bents H., Hautzinger M., Zipfel S., Wittorf A., Sammet I. (2017). The therapeutic alliance in different mental disorders: A comparison of patients with depression, somatoform, and eating disorders. Psychology and Psychotherapy. Theory Research and Practice, 90, 4: 649-667. doi: 10.1111/papt.12131.
  27. Ottavi P., Passarella T., Pasinetti M., Salvatore G., Diamggio G. (2015). Adapting Mindfulness for Treating Personality Disorders. In: Livesley W.J., Dimaggio G., Clarkin J.F. (eds.), Integrated Treatment for Personality Disorders. London: Guilford Press.
  28. Pulvermüller F. (2013). How neurons make meaning: Brain mechanisms for embodied and abstract-symbolic semantics. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 17, 9. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2013.06.004.
  29. Safran J.D., Kraus J. (2014). Alliance ruptures, impasse and enactments: relational
  30. perspective. Psychoetrapy Theory Research Practice Training, 51, 3. doi: 10.1037 a0036815.
  31. Safran J.D., Muran J.C. (2003). Teoria e pratica dell’alleanza terapeutica. Roma-Bari: Laterza.
  32. Salvatore G., Dimaggio G., Ottavi P., Popolo R. (2017). Terapia metacognitiva interpersonale della schizofrenia. La procedura formalizzata di intervento. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  33. Semerari A. (2005). La relazione terapeutica. In: Bara B. (a cura di), Nuovo manuale di terapia cognitiva. Volume primo. Teoria. Torino: Bollati Boringhieri.
  34. Semerari A., Carcione A., Dimaggio G., Falcone M., Nicolo G., Procacci M., Alleva G. (2003). How to evaluate metacognitive function in psychotherapy? The Metacognition Assessment Scale its applications. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy, 10, 4: 238-261. doi: 10.1002/cpp.362.
  35. Semerari A., Carcione A., Dimaggio G., Nicolò G., Procacci M. (2007). Understanding minds: Different functions and different disorders? The contribution of psychotherapy research. Psychotherapy Research, 17: 106-119. doi: 10.1080/10503300500536953.
  36. Wachtel P.L. (ed.) (1993). Therapeutic comunication: Principles and effective practice. New York: Guilford Press.
  37. Weiss J. (1993). How psychotherapy works: Process and technique. New York: Guilford.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...