Ann-
Probably best not to match, but to use several therapists of each
persuasion to have therapist differences randomize out. Additionally
(given world enough & time) you could counterbalance by having therapists
deal with 2 groups of Ss. For one group they would use their preferred
technique & for the other use the alternate treatment.
-Don.
********************************************************************
Don Allen email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dept. of Psychology voice: (604)-323-5871
Langara College fax: (604)-323-5555
100 W. 49th Ave.
Vancouver, B.C.
Canada, V5Y 2Z6
********************************************************************
On Wed, 11 Aug 1999, ANN MUIR THOMAS wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Aug 1999, Don Allen wrote:
>
> > Stephen-
> >
> > Not quite double blind, but very very close. You would also have to
> > ensure that the therapists were equally convinced of the effectiveness of
> > their treatments otherwise differential experimenter enthusiasm could
> > affect the Ss responses. That quibble aside, I agree that it would be a
> > good test of cognitive (or any other) therapy.
>
> I still see problems, if the cognitive-behavioral therapists and the
> psychodynamic/humanistic ones were *different* people. Hmmmm.... matching
> C-B and P-H therapists on relevant demographic and interpersonal
> variables... what would those variables be? And would matching even be
> possible?
>
> ------------------
> Ann Muir Thomas, Ph.D. http://erebus.bentley.edu/empl/t/athomas
> "The Accidental Jewess"
> Bentley College, Waltham, MA
>
> "You aren't belittled by being little. Only by acting small." --- Red
>
>
>
