1

Psychoanalytic psychotherapy: what’s the evidence?

Psychoanalytic psychotherapy has a strong and expanding evidence base. There now exists a large
number of outcome studies which have alternately examined the efficacy of short-term and long-
term psychoanalytic psychotherapy and the efficacy of psychoanalytic psychotherapy for specific
conditions. Of particular note is the consistent finding from this research of significantly increased
long-term follow up effect sizes: patients continue to make considerable gains long after treatment
has ended. There is also evidence that non-psychoanalytic forms of therapy may be effective because
of the inclusion of psychoanalytic techniques and process. Psychoanalytic and psychodynamic
psychotherapy are essentially interchangeable terms and for the purposes of brevity this paper uses
the term psychoanalytic.

Summary
There are now a significant number of well-designed studies which demonstrate the
efficacy of psychoanalytic psychotherapy. The research is objectively strong.
Psychoanalytic psychotherapy yields impressive effect sizes, with effect sizes
typically increasing at long-term follow up, suggesting that patients who receive
psychoanalytic psychotherapy experience continuing psychological benefits long
after therapy has ended.
Longer-term psychoanalytic psychotherapy (one year’s treatment or more) is more
effective than shorter forms of therapy for the treatment of complex mental
disorders.
Psychoanalytic psychotherapy has particularly promising findings in relation to
helping people with personality disorder. Mentalization-based therapy (a form of
psychoanalytic psychotherapy) has been shown to yield the most positive results for
personality pathology.
A growing body of evidence suggests that psychoanalytic psychotherapy is effective
for many common mental disorders, including depressive disorders, anxiety
disorders, eating disorders, post-traumatic stress disorder and substance-related
disorder.
There is also a growing body of evidence which suggests that non-psychoanalytic
therapies benefit from the inclusion of psychoanalytic processes and techniques.
Given the growing evidence base, it is time commissioners and health policy makers
turned their attention to psychoanalytic psychotherapy. It could help a great many
people with unmet mental health needs in the country.

Introduction
Psychoanalytic psychotherapy has endured a storm of criticism in recent years. Detractors
have pointed out that it lacks scientific credibility and health care policy makers now often
 2

assume that its evidence base is weak and patchy. Concurrent with this prevailing opinion
has been the rise of other forms of ‘talking treatment’, some of which, in particular
cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), have undergone thousands of studies that show their
effectiveness. Faced with the choice of commissioning a therapy such as CBT, which
appears to promise a fast cure and has a good evidence base, or of commissioning a therapy
such as psychoanalytic psychotherapy, which offers a longer course of treatment and
appears to have a weak evidence base, is it any wonder which choice commissioners have
all too often made?
The psychoanalytic community also needs to accept some responsibility for this state of
affairs. Until relatively recently, the community at large was slow, and even at times averse,
to conducting research. Research methods such as manualisation of treatments or
randomisation of patients seemed removed from clinical reality, and there was sometimes a
sense of anxiety of having to question beliefs about theory and technique collectively built
up from individual clinical experience and clinical lore. Moreover, much of the research that
was conducted historically lacked methodological rigour.
Nevertheless, the reader should note the deliberate reference to history. This is because,
gradually, and increasingly at a faster pace, the psychoanalytic community has come to
appreciate the value of research. As this paper will detail, there are now a significant
number of respectable, well-designed studies which demonstrate the efficacy of
psychoanalytic psychotherapy. The culture towards research is changing.
This paper presents the lay reader with some of the key findings from the research. In this
continuing climate of austerity and vastly cut back mental health services, the reader may
be particularly interested to note that the research suggests psychoanalytic therapy has a
significant positive long-term effect on patients. Although, as with any form of treatment,
there is still scope for further research, objectively the evidence is strong. The time has now
come when commissioners and health care policy makers should turn their attention to
psychoanalytic psychotherapy.

The defining elements of psychoanalytic psychotherapy

Psychoanalytic psychotherapy refers to a range of therapeutic treatments derived from
psychoanalytic ideas and methods and a critical appreciation of the effect of childhood
experiences on adult personality development. Patients are typically seen by therapists
once or twice a week, sit in a chair facing the therapist, and might be seen for months as
opposed to years as is typical in psychoanalysis.
Psychoanalytic psychotherapy utilises various techniques derived from psychoanalysis,
including:
Free association: therapy sessions deliberately have no formal structure, instead
encouraging the patient to talk about anything that is on their mind, or ‘free associating’.
The therapist tries to uncover unconscious themes underlying the patient’s discourse,
paying particular attention to points such as patient resistance to talking about certain
 3

subjects, and verbally intervenes in a range of ways – from offering empathy to more
exploratory or challenging interventions, such as interpretations.
Interpretations: the therapist offers these in order to help the patient gain insight into
repetitive conflicts prolonging their problems (Gabbard, 2004) and to aid the patient in
understanding their unconscious themes.
Use of the countertransference: the therapist also carefully notes their own feelings, or
‘countertransference’ towards the patient and the patient’s discourse. These can offer
insight into how the patient relates to people.
After analysing many hundreds of hours of transcripts and recordings of therapy sessions,
Blagys and Hilsenroth (2000) identified seven core processes and techniques which
distinguish manualised psychoanalytic psychotherapy from other therapies:
1) Explaining emotions: patients are encouraged to explore their emotions in depth.
The therapist helps the patient to identify how they feel, putting contradictory and
troubling feelings into words. It is believed that emotional insight, in contrast to
intellectual insight, can lead to profound change.

2) Exploring efforts to avoid distressing thoughts and feelings: people do things to avoid
thoughts and feelings which trouble them in a variety of ways – from the subtle –
focusing on facts rather than how they feel about something – to the more obvious –
such as going quiet in a session. The therapist will encourage the patient to explore
what is distressing them.

3) Identifying reoccurring patterns: the therapist will try to identify and explore
recurring patterns in patients’ thoughts, feelings, relationships and life. Patients may
be extremely aware or they may be distressingly unaware of such patterns.

4) Discussing past experience: psychoanalytic psychotherapists recognise that the past,

particularly early attachment experiences, influences the development of the adult
personality and functioning. Therapists explore a patient’s past in order to gain
further insight into a patient’s present psychology.

5) Focus on relationships: psychoanalytic psychotherapists recognise that psychological

difficulties are largely rooted in problems in how the patient relates to others and
therapists will try to explore a patient’s past and present relationships.

6) Considering the relationship between the patient and therapist: the therapist will
examine this relationship (sometimes referred to as ‘transference’) because patients
tend to interact with their therapist in the same way they will interact with other
people.

7) Exploring fantasy life: psychoanalytic psychotherapy encourages patients to talk

freely about whatever is on their minds. Patients will discuss many thoughts, such as
 4

desires, dreams and fantasies. These thoughts are a potential treasure chest of
information into the patient.
Above all, the aim of psychoanalytic psychotherapy is to go beyond remission of symptoms
and to instil psychological strengths in a patient, giving patients the ability to better face

Research Terms
Control Group: group in an experiment that receives no treatment or a different treatment to
the experimental group. Allows researchers to compare to the experimental group.

Effect size: a way of quantifying how effective an intervention is, measuring the size of the
difference between an experimental group and a control group. An effect size of 0.8 represents
a large effect size, 0.5 a medium effect size and 0.2 a small effect size.

Efficacy: how far an intervention is able to cause its intended effect during clinical trials.

Long-term follow up: where patients who underwent an intervention are revisited after an
interval of time to measure the treatment effect size after this time interval.

Meta-analysis: statistically comparing results from independent studies with related hypotheses,
to reach conclusions about the efficacy of 1 or more treatments.

Randomized controlled trial: a type of scientific experiment whereby patients are randomly
allocated to receive one or other of the different treatments being studied, after which any
differences detected between patients should be because of the treatments under comparison,
and not due to any other factor.

difficulties and challenges and the capacity to live a fuller and richer life in the present.

The evidence:
1) For psychoanalytic psychotherapy in general
The past two decades have seen a rise in the number of high-quality randomised controlled
trials (RCTs) of psychoanalytic psychotherapy. Shedler (2010) highlights various meta-
analyses, which aggregate results from these RCTS and demonstrate that psychoanalytic
psychotherapies yield impressive effect sizes. Among these, there is, for example, a meta-
analysis published by the Cochrane Library, which examined 23 RCTs of a total of 1,431
patients (Abbass, Hancock, Henderson et al, 2006). The RCTs compared patients with a
range of common mental disorders who received short-term psychoanalytic psychotherapy
with controls who received minimal treatment and non-treatment interventions, yielding an
overall effect size of 0.97 for general symptom improvement. This effect size increased to
1.51 when the patients were assessed 9 months after treatment. The meta-analysis also
reported an effect size of 0.81 for change in somatic symptoms, increasing to 2.21 at long-
term follow up; an effect size of 1.08 for change in anxiety ratings, increasing to 1.35 at
follow up; and an effect size of 0.59 for change in depressive symptoms, which increased to
0.98 at follow-up. This trend to larger effect sizes at follow up suggests that patients who
received psychoanalytic psychotherapy experience continuing psychological benefits long
after therapy has ended.
 5

A meta-analysis reported in the journal Archives of General Psychiatry (Leichsenring, Rabung

and Leibung, 2004) examined 17 RCTs of short-term psychoanalytic psychotherapy and
reported an effect size of 1.17 compared with control interventions. The pre-treatment to
post-treatment effect size was 1.39, increasing to 1.57 at long-term follow up (an average
13 months after treatment).
Two further meta-analyses, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association

The significance of long-term follow up effect sizes

A consistent finding from the research is that patients who undergo psychoanalytic
psychotherapy appear to be making considerable psychological gains long after treatment has
ended. An increasing number of meta-analyses (such as Abbass et al, 2009; de Maat et al, 2009;
Leichsenring and Rabung, 2008; Leichsenring et al, 2004) suggest that this is the case, with larger
effect sizes found at follow-up than at the end of treatment.

By contrast, the benefits of other therapies tend to decay over time (de Maat, Dekker, Schoevers
et al, 2006; Hollon et al, 2005; Westen, Novotny, and Thompson-Brenner, 2004; excepting
manualized treatments for specific anxiety conditions – see Westen et al, 2004).

(Leichsenring and Rabung, 2008; de Matt et al, 2009) examined the efficacy of longer-term
psychoanalytic psychotherapy (one year’s treatment or more). Leichsenring and Rabung
compared longer-term psychoanalytic therapy with shorter forms of therapy for the
treatment of complex mental disorders (defined as multiple or chronic mental disorders, or
personality disorders) and found it to be much more effective than shorter forms of
therapy. An overall effect size of 1.8 was found, with a pre-treatment to post-treatment
overall effect size of 1.03, which increased to 1.25 at long-term follow up. De Maat et al
examined the effectiveness of long-term psychoanalytic psychotherapy for patients with a
range of DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, American Psychiatric
Association) diagnoses. For patients with mixed/moderate pathology, the pre-treatment to
post-treatment effect size was 0.78 for general symptom improvement, increasing to 0.94 at
long-term follow up, at an average of 3.2 years after treatment. For patients with severe
personality pathology, the pre-treatment to post-treatment effect was 0.94, increasing to
1.02 at long-term follow up, at an average of 5.2 years after follow up.

2) For psychoanalytic psychotherapy and specific disorders

A common criticism thrown at studies of psychoanalytic psychotherapy is that they focus on
a range of patient symptoms and conditions rather than on specific diagnostic categories,
and that consequently their findings have limited real world clinical utility (for example,
Westen et al, 2004). At the same time, the reader should be aware that there is widespread
concern about the clinical utility of diagnostic categories (such as in the Diagnostic and
Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 5th edition, DSM-5, American Psychiatric Association,
2013). Specifically, the concern is that such categories do not accurately define patient
groups, given that psychiatric comorbidity is common and that diagnosable complaints are
often embedded in personality syndromes (Blatt and Zuroff, 2005; Westen, Gabbard and
Blavgov, 2006). A number of studies have focused on psychiatric comorbidity, with some
 6

(such as that of Abbass, Town and Driessen, 2011) recommending psychoanalytic

psychotherapy be considered as a first line treatment. Nonetheless, there are an increasing
number of studies focusing on specific diagnoses (such as Bateman and Fonagy, 2008;
Clarkin et al, 2007; Culpers, van Straten; Andersson et al, 2008; Leichsenring, 2001, 2005;
Milrod et al, 2007).
Findings in relation to personality disorders are perhaps the most promising (such as
Winston, 1994; Hellerstein et al, 1998; Town et al, 2011). A meta-analysis examining the
efficacy of both psychoanalytic psychotherapy and CBT for personality disorder published in
the American Journal of Psychiatry (Leichsenring and Leibing, 2003) showed pre- to post-
treatment effect sizes of 1.46 for psychoanalytic psychotherapy and 1.0 for CBT. A study by
Bateman and Fonagy (2008) showed that mentalization-based therapy (MBT – a
psychoanalytic psychotherapy adapted for personality disorder) leads to enduring benefits
five years after completion. At five-year follow up, 87% of patients who received ‘treatment
as usual’ still met diagnostic criteria for borderline personality disorder, compared to 13% of
patients who had received psychoanalytic therapy. There is as yet, no other treatment
which yields such positive results for personality pathology.
There is also a slowly growing body of evidence which suggests that psychoanalytic
psychotherapy is an effective treatment for major depressive disorder (e.g. Driessen et al,
2013) and for somatic disorders and medically unexplained symptoms (Abbas et al, 2008;
2009).
Most recently, Leichsenring and Klein (2014) reviewed the evidence for psychoanalytic
therapy for specific mental disorders in adults, meta-analysing 47 RCTs published between
January 1970 and September 2013 that looked at the efficacy of psychoanalytic
psychotherapy for specific mental disorders using treatment manuals and valid measures
for diagnosis and outcome. The meta-analysis showed that psychoanalytic therapy is
efficacious for many common (and diagnosable) mental disorders, including depressive
disorders, anxiety disorders, personality disorders, eating disorders, post-traumatic stress
disorder and substance-related disorder.

Psychoanalytic techniques and process in other therapies

There are also an increasing number of studies which suggest that non-psychoanalytic
therapies benefit from the inclusion of psychoanalytic elements. As Elkin et al (1989)
pointed out, it is not unusual for therapists to incorporate processes and techniques not
associated with their treatment manual into practice and for therapists providing the same
treatment to interact with patients in a variety of ways. Studies examining transcripts or
recordings of therapy sessions suggest that psychoanalytic techniques and processes are
commonly used by non-psychoanalytic therapists (Goldfried and Wolfe, 1996; Kazdin, 2007,
2008). Furthermore, the active ‘agents of change’ of some therapies may not be those
presumed by the theory or model behind the therapy. Kazdin (2007) for example, notes
that the agents of change in cognitive therapy do not seem to be the cognitions as
presumed by the theory.
 7

Shedler (2010) highlights a number of studies which suggest that psychoanalytic processes
and techniques are used by non-psychoanalytic therapists and lead to successful outcome in
non-analytic therapies (such as Diener, Hilsenroth and Weinberger, 2007; Hoglend et al,
2008; Vocisano et al, 2004). Among these, ones associated with the Psychotherapy Process
Q-Sort (PQS) might be of most interest (Jones, 2000). The PQS includes 100 variables which
assess the therapy process based on matters such as the behaviour and actions of the
therapist. A study by Ablon and Jones (1998) for example, asked experts in CBT and
psychoanalytic therapy to use the PQS to describe ideally conducted treatments. Following
feedback from these experts, prototypes of ideally constructed CBT and psychoanalytic
psychotherapy were made. The CBT prototype focused on highly structured treatment,
with the therapist introducing topics and discussing patient treatment goals. The
psychoanalytic prototype focused on unstructured, open-ended dialogue, with the therapist
identifying recurring themes in the patient’s experience and drawing attention to feelings
regarded by the patient as unacceptable. Ablon and Jones examined three archival
treatment records (one for cognitive therapy, two for brief psychodynamic therapy),
focusing on therapist adherence to each therapy prototype without regard to the treatment
model the therapists thought they were applying. Therapist adherence to the
psychoanalytic prototype predicted successful outcome in both psychoanalytic and
cognitive therapy, whereas therapist adherence to the CBT prototype beared little or no
relation to outcome in either type of therapy. These findings echo those of Jones and Pulos
(1993) who found that psychoanalytic interventions predicted successful outcome for both
psychoanalytic and cognitive therapy. Other studies have reported positive relations
between CBT technique and outcome (such as Strunk, DeRubeis, Chiu et al, 2007) but
findings suggest that the more effective therapists utilise psychoanalytic process and
techniques.

Conclusions
One can now state with confidence that the evidence base for psychoanalytic
psychotherapy is strong and credible and that psychoanalytic psychotherapy is efficacious in
the treatment of a wide range of mental health conditions and disorders. A historical
antipathy to research in the psychoanalytic community is increasingly giving way to active
and willing involvement in research. Moreover, after a spate of poor trials (with for
example, too small patient samples), studies are now becoming much tighter and more
methodologically rigorous. In this way, research in psychoanalytic psychotherapy is
beginning to catch up with the large number of methodologically sound RCTs conducted on
other forms of therapy such as CBT.
There is also a real incentive for commissioners and health policy makers to turn to
psychoanalytic psychotherapy. As the public policy landscape points out (for example, the
British Psychoanalytic Council and UK Council for Psychotherapy, 2015; Mind, 2013, 2014)
many people who would benefit from psychoanalytic psychotherapy are currently unable to
access appropriate treatments on the NHS. It is therefore of acute concern that an
increasing number of NHS services providing psychoanalytic forms of treatment are being
 8

decommissioned (British Psychoanalytic Council and UK Council for Psychotherapy, 2013,

2015).
It should also be noted definitively that psychoanalytic psychotherapy does have scientific
support. Sweeping assertions that psychoanalytic work lacks any scientific credibility can no
longer stand up to scrutiny (such as Barlow and Durand, 2005). Perpetuating such
assertions also does a disservice to patients. Further, psychoanalytic psychotherapy shows
significantly strong effect sizes at long-term follow up. The evidence makes it clear that
patients receive lasting benefits, which go well beyond the remission of symptoms.
Above all, in the often fractious and sometimes competing world of psychological therapies,
it is time for all researchers to collaborate more, to think again about what is really in the
best long-term interests of patients. Patients deserve the most appropriate treatments and
it is the job of researchers to lay aside any therapeutic allegiances they may have and work
solely in the interests of those experiencing mental distress.

References
APA. (2013) Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders 5th ed. Washington, DC.

Abbass, AA., Hancock, JT., Henderson, J., et al (2006) Short-term psychodynamic

psychotherapies for common mental disorders. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews,
4: CD004687.
Abbass, A., Kisely, S., Kroenke, K (2009) Short-term psychodynamic psychotherapy for
somatic disorders: Systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials. Psychotherapy and
Psychosomatics, 78: 265-274.
Abbas, A., Sheldon, A., Gyra, J., et al (2008) Intensive short-term dynamic psychotherapy for
DSM-IV personality disorder: a randomized controlled trial. Journal of Nervous and Mental
Disease, 196: 211-216.
Abbas, A., Town, J., Driessen, E (2011) The efficacy of short-term psychodynamic
psychotherapy for depressive disorders with comorbid personality disorder. Psychiatry,
74(1): 58-71.
Barlow, DH., Durand, VM (2005) Abnormal psychology: An integrative approach (4th edition).
Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Bateman, A., Fonagy, P (2008) 8-year follow-up of patients treated for borderline
personality disorder: Mentalization-based treatment versus treatment as usual. American
Journal of Psychiatry, 6: 631-638.
Blagys, M., Hilsenroth, M (2000) Distinctive features of short-term psychodynamic-
interpersonal psychotherapy: a review of the comparative psychotherapy process literature.
Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 7: 167-188.
Blatt, SJ., Zuroff, DC (2005) Empirical evaluation of the assumptions in identifying evidence-
based treatments in mental health. Clinical Psychology Review, 25: 459-486.
 9

British Psychoanalytic Council, UK Council for Psychotherapy (2013) Quality Psychotherapy

Services in the NHS: Summary Findings from the UK Council for Psychotherapy and British
Psychoanalytic Council Members’ Survey. BPC/UKCP.
British Psychoanalytic Council, UK Council for Psychotherapy (2015) Addressing the
deterioration in public psychotherapy provision. BPC/UKCP
Clarkin, JF., Levy, KN., Lensenweger, MF., et al (2007) Evaluating three treatments for
borderline personality disorder: A multiwave study. American Journal of Psychiatry, 164:
922-928.
Cuijpers, P., Van Straten, A., Andersson, G., et al (2008) Psychotherapy for depression in
adults: A meta-analysis of comparative outcome studies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Psychology, 76: 909-922.
De Matt, D., De Jonghe, F., Schoevers, R, et al (2009) The effectiveness of long term
psychoanalytic psychotherapy: a systemic review of empirical studies. Harvard Review of
Psychiatry, 17: 1-23.
De Matt, D., Dekker, J., De Jonghe, F., et al (2006) Relative efficacy of psychotherapy and
pharmacotherapy in the treatment of depression: A meta-analysis. Psychotherapy
Research, 16: 562-572.
Diener, MJ., Hilsenroth, MJ., Weinberger J (2007) Therapist affect focus and patient
outcomes in psychoanalytic psychotherapy: A meta-analysis. American Journal of
Psychiatry, 164: 936-941.
Elkin, I., Shea., T., Watkins, JT., et al (1989) National Institutes of Mental Health Treatment
of Depression Collaborative Research Program. Archives of General Psychiatry, 46: 971-982.
Goldfried, MR., Wolfe, BE (1996) Psychotherapy practice and research: Repairing a strained
alliance. American Psychologist, 51: 1007-1016.
Hellerstein, DJ., Rosenthal, RN., Pinsker, H., et al (1988) A randomized prospective study
comparing supportive and dynamic therapies: Outcome and alliance. Journal of
Psychotherapy Practice and Research, 7: 261-271.
Hoglend, P., Bogwald, KP., Amlo, S., et al (2008) Transference interpretations in dynamic
psychotherapy: So they really yield sustained effects? American Journal of Psychiatry, 165:
763-771.
Hollon, SD., De Rubeis, RJ., Shelton, RC., et al (2005) Prevention of relapse following
cognitive therapy vs medications in moderate to severe depression. Archives of General
Psychiatry, 62: 417-422.
Jones, EE., Pulos, SM (1993) Comparing the process in psychodynamic and cognitive
behavioural therapies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 61: 306-316.
Jones, EE (2000) Therapeutic action: A guide to psychoanalytic therapy. Northvale, NJ: Jason
Aronson.
 10

Kazdin, AE (2007) Mediator and mechanisms of change in psychotherapy research. Annual

Review of Clinical Psychology, 61: 1-27.
Kazdin, AE (2008) Evidence-based treatment and practice: New opportunities to bridge
clinical research and practise, enhance the knowledge base, and improve patient care.
American Psychologist, 63: 146-159.
Leichsenring, F., Klein, S (2014) Evidence for psychodynamic psychotherapy in specific
mental disorders: a systematic review. Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy, 28: 4-32.
Leichsenring, F., Rabung, S (2008) Effectiveness of long-term psychodynamic psychotherapy.
Journal of the American Medical Association, 300: 1151-65.
Leichsenring, F., Rabung, S (2011) Long-term psychodynamic psychotherapy in complex
mental disorders: Update of meta-analysis. British Journal of Psychiatry, 199: 15-22.
Leichsenring, F (2001) Comparative effects of short-term psychodynamic psychotherapy and
cognitive-behavioural therapy in depression: A meta-analytic approach. Clinical Psychology
Review, 21: 401-419.
Leichsenring, F (2005) Are psychodynamic and psychoanalytic therapies effective?
International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 86: 841-868.
Leichsenring, F., Leibing, E (2003) The effectiveness of psychodynamic therapy and cognitive
behaviour therapy in the treatment of personality disorders: A meta-analysis. American
Journal of Psychiatry, 160: 1223-1232.
Leichsenring, F., Rabung, S., Leibing, E (2004) The efficacy of short-term psychodynamic
psychotherapy in specific psychiatric disorders. A meta-analysis. Journal of the American
Medical Association, 300: 1551-1565.
Milrod, B., Leon, AC., Busch, F., et al (2007) A randomized controlled trial of psychoanalytic
psychotherapy for panic disorder. American Journal of Psychiatry, 164: 265-272.
Mind (2013) We still need to talk. A report on access to talking therapies.
Mind (2014) Commissioning talking therapies to meet need. A briefing from the We Need to
Talk coalition.
Shedler, J. (2010) The efficacy of psychodynamic psychotherapy. American Psychologist, 65:
98-109.
Strunk, DR., DeRubeis, RJ., Chiu, AW., et al (2007) Patients’ competence in and performance
of cognitive therapy skills: Relation to the reduction of relapse risk following treatment for
depression. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 75: 523-530.
Vocisano, C., Klein, DN., Arnow, B., et al (2004) Therapist variables that predict change in
psychotherapy with chronically depressed outpatients. Psychotherapy, 41: 255-265.
 11

Westen, D., Gabbard, G., Blavgo, P (2006) Back to the future: Personality structure as a
context for psychopathology. From R.F. Krueger & J.L. Tackett, Personality and
psychopathology (pp.335-384). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Westen, D., Novotny, CM., Thompson-Brenner, H (2004) The empirical status of empirically
supported psychotherapies: Assumptions, findings and reporting in controlled clinical trials.
Psychological Bulletin, 130: 631-663.
Winston, A., Laikin, M., Pollack, J., Samstag, LW., McCullough, L., & Muran, JC (1994). Short
term psychotherapy of personality disorders. American Journal of Psychiatry, 151: 190-194.
Yakeley, J. (2014). Psychodynamic psychotherapy: developing the evidence base. Advances
in psychiatric treatment, 20: 269 – 279.