Psychotherapy research : journal of the Society for Psychotherapy Research · 2026
Testing the alliance rupture repair model on two cases with successful and unsuccessful rupture repair: a task analytic validation study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ingvardsen Vemmelund Louise, Spaanheden Moeslund Anne-Sophie, Steen Høgenhaug Stine, Østergård Ole Karkov
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to test and refine the complete alliance rupture repair model (RRM), consisting of three pathways, in short-term psychodynamic psychotherapy.
METHOD: The validation phase of task analysis was applied in a multi-method case study design to compare therapeutic strategies in a successful repair case (SRC) and an unsuccessful repair case (URC). The Working Alliance Inventory - Short was utilized to select cases and sessions, while the revised Rupture Resolution Rating System (3RS) provided the framework for analyzing the six selected sessions.
RESULTS: The study found that pathway 1 strategies (acceptance, validation, curiosity, and engagement) were more frequently utilized in the SRC. These strategies were also linked to repair segments in both cases. Conversely, pathway 2 strategies (renegotiating tasks and goals) were employed less frequently in both cases and did not lead to successful repair. Pathway 3 strategies (exploring the rupture experience) were particularly effective in repairing the rupture in the SRC. However, in the URC, these strategies appeared to exacerbate the rupture.
CONCLUSION: Pathway 1 strategies are crucial, serving both as an independent approach and as a foundational element for effectively implementing strategies in pathway 3, and likely in pathway 2 as well.
METHOD: The validation phase of task analysis was applied in a multi-method case study design to compare therapeutic strategies in a successful repair case (SRC) and an unsuccessful repair case (URC). The Working Alliance Inventory - Short was utilized to select cases and sessions, while the revised Rupture Resolution Rating System (3RS) provided the framework for analyzing the six selected sessions.
RESULTS: The study found that pathway 1 strategies (acceptance, validation, curiosity, and engagement) were more frequently utilized in the SRC. These strategies were also linked to repair segments in both cases. Conversely, pathway 2 strategies (renegotiating tasks and goals) were employed less frequently in both cases and did not lead to successful repair. Pathway 3 strategies (exploring the rupture experience) were particularly effective in repairing the rupture in the SRC. However, in the URC, these strategies appeared to exacerbate the rupture.
CONCLUSION: Pathway 1 strategies are crucial, serving both as an independent approach and as a foundational element for effectively implementing strategies in pathway 3, and likely in pathway 2 as well.