What interventions facilitate client progress through the assimilation model? A task analysis of interventions in the psychodynamic treatment of depression.

A variation of task analysis was used to build an empirical model of how therapists may facilitate client assimilation process, described in the Assimilation of Problematic Experiences Scale. A rational model was specified and considered in light of an analysis of therapist in-session performances (N = 117) drawn from six inpatient therapies for depression. The therapist interventions were measured by the Comprehensive Psychotherapeutic Interventions Rating Scale. Consistent with the rational model, confronting interventions were particularly useful in helping clients elaborate insight. However, rather than there being a small number of progress-related interventions at lower levels of assimilation, therapists' use of interventions was broader than hypothesized and drew from a wide range of therapeutic approaches. Concerning the higher levels of assimilation, there was insufficient data to allow an analysis of the therapist's progress-related interventions.

Under what conditions? Therapist and client characteristics moderate the role of change talk in brief motivational intervention.

OBJECTIVE: Client change talk has been proposed as a mechanism of change in motivational interviewing (MI) by mediating the link between therapist MI-consistent behaviors (MICO) and client behavioral outcomes. We tested under what circumstances this mechanism was supported in the context of a clinical trial of brief MI for heavy drinking among nontreatment seeking young men. METHOD: We conducted psycholinguistic coding of 174 sessions using the MI Skill Code 2.1 and derived the frequency of MICO and the strength of change talk (CTS) averaged over the session. CTS was examined as a mediator of the relationship between MICO and a drinking composite score measured at 3-month follow-up, controlling for the composite measure at baseline. Finally, we tested therapist gender and MI experience as well as client readiness to change and alcohol problem severity as moderators of this mediation model. RESULTS: CTS significantly predicted outcome (higher strength related to less drinking), but MICO did not predict CTS. However, CTS mediated the relationship between MICO and drinking outcomes when therapists had more experience in MI and when clients had more severe alcohol problems (i.e., significant conditional indirect effects). CONCLUSIONS: The mechanism hypothesized by MI theory was operative in our brief MI with heavy drinking young men, but only under particular conditions. Our results suggest that attention should be paid to therapist selection, training, and/or supervision until they reach a certain level of competence, and that MI might not be appropriate for nontreatment seeking clients drinking at a lower level of risk. (PsycINFO Database Record