What do you think?
Rate this book
Psychodynamic-Interpersonal Therapy: A Conversational Model
This book presents for the first time, a practical manual for psychodynamic-interpersonal therapy. Drawing on forty years of research, teaching and practice, its expert authors guide you through the conversational model’s theory, skills and implications for practice.
Part I sets out the model’s underlying theory and outlines the evidence for its efficacy with client groups.
Part II guides you through clinical skills of the model, from foundational to advanced.
Part III offers practical guidance on implementing the approach within a range of settings, and for developing effective practice through reflection and supervision.
Part I sets out the model’s underlying theory and outlines the evidence for its efficacy with client groups.
Part II guides you through clinical skills of the model, from foundational to advanced.
Part III offers practical guidance on implementing the approach within a range of settings, and for developing effective practice through reflection and supervision.
206 pages, Kindle Edition
Published November 10, 2016
7 people are currently reading
14 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
December 10, 2023
I read this as part of my on going professional development. Someone mentioned that they did Interpersonal Therapy and I had no clue what this was, so I needed to enlighten myself. I found this builds on the work of Robert Hobson and Russell Meares who are the founders of the Conversational Model, which I am familiar with as part of the Psychodynamic approach. The key learning we to use reflective statements and don’t ask questions that intellectualise the experience of the person. The foundation of this was familiar from Iain Mc Gilchrist’s ‘The Master and his Emissary’. When we intellectualise, we are speaking to the rationale Emissary, not the intuitive Master.
Barkham et al identify the difference between adherence and competence in the practice of Therapy. Adherence: is following a particular model and way of doing things (I am not good at this). Competence is being able to use skills appropriately at the time they are needed by the person (I suspect I am better at this).
As part of the model Barkham et al reinforce the importance of rupture/repair in the Therapuetic relationship and give “a model of repair that included six stages: (1) acknowledgement; (2) negotiation. (3) exploration; (4) consensus and renegotiation; (5) enhanced exploration; (6) closure” (p 43)”. I am sure this is acknowledge by both Hobson and Meares, as it was quite familiar to me. The metaphor I was is of getting stronger from weight training. You must get the balance right. If you train too much, you are too much rupture and not enough repair. You have to allow time for repair. If you do not train at all, you have no opportunity to rupture and take benefit of the effect of the Talebian ‘anti-fragile’ nature of the self.
Note to self – be aware of below:
“Psychodynamic-Interpersonal Therapy Assimilation Stages:
Level 0 – Warded off/dissociated: Content is unformed; client is unaware of the problem.
Level 1 – Unwanted thoughts: Content reflects emergence of thoughts associated active avoidance with discomfort. Client prefers not to think about it; therapist or external circumstances raise topics.
Level 2 – Vague awareness: Clients acknowledges the existence of a problematic emergence experience and clearly describes uncomfortable associated thoughts but cannot formulate the problem clearly.
Level 3 – Problem statement: Content included a clear statement of problem, clarification something that could be worked on.
Level 4 – Understanding/insight: The problematic experience is placed into a schema, formulated and understood with clear connective links.
Level 5 – Application/working: The understanding is used to work on a problem; through there is reference to specific problem-solving, although without complete success.
Level 6 - Problem solution: Client achieves a successful solution to a specific resourcefulness problem.
Level 7 – Mastery/integration: Clients successfully uses solutions in new situations; this generalising is largely automatic, not salient” (p 48).
Barkham et al provide a guideline where a Psychodynamic approach or a Cognitive approach may be more effective. “PI Therapy is effective when the client still has difficulty articulating the problem but experiences distress, whereas cognitive approaches may be preferable when the problem has already been clarified (p 49).
Barkham et al identified the aim of “Psychotherapy is a creative process of personal problem solving. Problems are manifest and explored in the therapeutic conversation. This process begins with the bringing or experiences and feelings into the ‘here and now’. Avoidance actions are abandoned and a degree of conflict and stress is tolerated. The connection between feelings and key relationships becomes apparent and possible solutions are created through an imaginative feeling language” (p 70).
“Hobson preferred not to have any prior information about the person he would see as he would say, ‘I want to know them. I don’t want to know “about” the.’ He was also concerned that his judgement may be biased or altered by hearing other people’s concerns about the person he was about to meet” (p 78). I agree with this. When I meet someone professionally I like to go in ‘blind’ and see how the relationship develops. I am not for everyone, not everyone is for me.
This is an academic book, written for clinicians. It lacks flow and at times get stuck in navel gazing jargon and you have to read a passage a number of times to understand what it means. I do not understand what the authors found the need to re-brand the Conversational Model as Interpersonal Therapy. To be fair they are not the only ones, and I understand that a view could be taken the Hobson and Meares re-branded Interpersonal Therapy into the Conversational Model. That is the industry, take what is old and make it new again. It has inspired me to read Hildegard Peplau and Harry Stack Sullivan to continue my learning around Psychodynamic Psychotherapy.
Barkham et al identify the difference between adherence and competence in the practice of Therapy. Adherence: is following a particular model and way of doing things (I am not good at this). Competence is being able to use skills appropriately at the time they are needed by the person (I suspect I am better at this).
As part of the model Barkham et al reinforce the importance of rupture/repair in the Therapuetic relationship and give “a model of repair that included six stages: (1) acknowledgement; (2) negotiation. (3) exploration; (4) consensus and renegotiation; (5) enhanced exploration; (6) closure” (p 43)”. I am sure this is acknowledge by both Hobson and Meares, as it was quite familiar to me. The metaphor I was is of getting stronger from weight training. You must get the balance right. If you train too much, you are too much rupture and not enough repair. You have to allow time for repair. If you do not train at all, you have no opportunity to rupture and take benefit of the effect of the Talebian ‘anti-fragile’ nature of the self.
Note to self – be aware of below:
“Psychodynamic-Interpersonal Therapy Assimilation Stages:
Level 0 – Warded off/dissociated: Content is unformed; client is unaware of the problem.
Level 1 – Unwanted thoughts: Content reflects emergence of thoughts associated active avoidance with discomfort. Client prefers not to think about it; therapist or external circumstances raise topics.
Level 2 – Vague awareness: Clients acknowledges the existence of a problematic emergence experience and clearly describes uncomfortable associated thoughts but cannot formulate the problem clearly.
Level 3 – Problem statement: Content included a clear statement of problem, clarification something that could be worked on.
Level 4 – Understanding/insight: The problematic experience is placed into a schema, formulated and understood with clear connective links.
Level 5 – Application/working: The understanding is used to work on a problem; through there is reference to specific problem-solving, although without complete success.
Level 6 - Problem solution: Client achieves a successful solution to a specific resourcefulness problem.
Level 7 – Mastery/integration: Clients successfully uses solutions in new situations; this generalising is largely automatic, not salient” (p 48).
Barkham et al provide a guideline where a Psychodynamic approach or a Cognitive approach may be more effective. “PI Therapy is effective when the client still has difficulty articulating the problem but experiences distress, whereas cognitive approaches may be preferable when the problem has already been clarified (p 49).
Barkham et al identified the aim of “Psychotherapy is a creative process of personal problem solving. Problems are manifest and explored in the therapeutic conversation. This process begins with the bringing or experiences and feelings into the ‘here and now’. Avoidance actions are abandoned and a degree of conflict and stress is tolerated. The connection between feelings and key relationships becomes apparent and possible solutions are created through an imaginative feeling language” (p 70).
“Hobson preferred not to have any prior information about the person he would see as he would say, ‘I want to know them. I don’t want to know “about” the.’ He was also concerned that his judgement may be biased or altered by hearing other people’s concerns about the person he was about to meet” (p 78). I agree with this. When I meet someone professionally I like to go in ‘blind’ and see how the relationship develops. I am not for everyone, not everyone is for me.
This is an academic book, written for clinicians. It lacks flow and at times get stuck in navel gazing jargon and you have to read a passage a number of times to understand what it means. I do not understand what the authors found the need to re-brand the Conversational Model as Interpersonal Therapy. To be fair they are not the only ones, and I understand that a view could be taken the Hobson and Meares re-branded Interpersonal Therapy into the Conversational Model. That is the industry, take what is old and make it new again. It has inspired me to read Hildegard Peplau and Harry Stack Sullivan to continue my learning around Psychodynamic Psychotherapy.
Displaying 1 of 1 review