Alan E. Kazdin

Assessing the Clinical or Applied Importance of Behavior Change through Social Validation

Applied behavior analysis has emphasized that the effects of treatment interventions should be evaluated in part on the basis of whether changes of clinical, social, or applied importance have been achieved. Recently, social validation has been proposed as a means of evaluating whether behavior changes achieved during treatment are clinically important. In the context of evaluating treatment outcome, social validation consists of two procedures. First, the behavior of the target subject is compared with that of his or her peers who have not been identified as problematic. Second, subjective evaluations of the target subjects behavior by individuals in the natural environment are solicited. Behavior changes can be viewed as clinically important if the intervention has brought the clients performance within the range of socially acceptable levels, as evidenced by the clients peer group, or if the clients behavior is judged by others as reflecting a qualitative improvement on global ratings. The present paper reviews the literature on social validation in applied behavior analysis and discusses problems in assessing and interpreting normative data and subjective evaluations.

Evidence-based treatment and practice: new opportunities to bridge clinical research and practice, enhance the knowledge base, and improve patient care.

The long-standing divide between research and practice in clinical psychology has received increased attention in view of the development of evidence-based interventions and practice and public interest, oversight, and management of psychological services. The gap has been reflected in concerns from those in practice about the applicability of findings from psychotherapy research as a guide to clinical work and concerns from those in research about how clinical work is conducted. Research and practice are united in their commitment to providing the best of psychological knowledge and methods to improve the quality of patient care. This article highlights issues in the research- practice debate as a backdrop for rapprochement. Suggestions are made for changes and shifts in emphases in psychotherapy research and clinical practice. The changes are designed to ensure that both research and practice contribute to our knowledge base and provide information that can be used more readily to improve patient care and, in the process, reduce the perceived and real hiatus between research and practice.

Identifying and developing empirically supported child and adolescent treatments.

Child and adolescent therapy outcome research findings attest to the efficacy of a variety of treatments. This article illustrates promising treatments for selected internalizing (anxiety and depression), externalizing (oppositional, and antisocial behavior), and other (obesity and autism) conditions, and for other aims (preparation for medical and dental procedures). Studies in these areas illustrate worthwhile characteristics that can help inform the search for empirically supported treatments. These characteristics include randomized controlled trials, well-described and replicable treatments, tests with clinical samples, tests of clinical significance, broad-based outcome assessment including measures of real-world functioning, and others. Continued research progress will depend on greater attention to magnitude and maintenance of therapeutic change, long-term follow-up, moderators and mediators of change, and development and testing of treatment in conditions relevant to clinical practice.

Rebooting Psychotherapy Research and Practice to Reduce the Burden of Mental Illness

Psychological interventions to treat mental health issues have developed remarkably in the past few decades. Yet this progress often neglects a central goal—namely, to reduce the burden of mental illness and related conditions. The need for psychological services is enormous, and only a small proportion of individuals in need actually receive treatment. Individual psychotherapy, the dominant model of treatment delivery, is not likely to be able to meet this need. Despite advances, mental health professionals are not likely to reduce the prevalence, incidence, and burden of mental illness without a major shift in intervention research and clinical practice. A portfolio of models of delivery will be needed. We illustrate various models of delivery to convey opportunities provided by technology, special settings and nontraditional service providers, self-help interventions, and the media. Decreasing the burden of mental illness also will depend on integrating prevention and treatment, developing assessment and a national database for monitoring mental illness and its burdens, considering contextual issues that influence delivery of treatment, and addressing potential tensions within the mental health professions. Finally, opportunities for multidisciplinary collaborations are discussed as key considerations for reducing the burden of mental illness.

Delineating mechanisms of change in child and adolescent therapy: methodological issues and research recommendations

BACKGROUND Mechanisms of therapeutic change are rarely studied in child and adolescent therapy. Our central thesis is that the study of mechanisms of treatment is an excellent investment for improving clinical practice and patient care. Indeed, extending treatment trials to clinical settings, without complementary research that studies why and how treatment works, could have great limitations. METHOD In this article, we discuss the importance of studying mechanisms, the logical and methodological requirements, and why almost no studies to date provide evidence for why or how treatment works. Standard statistical practices (tests of mediation) and designs (randomized controlled clinical trials) contribute greatly to outcome research but have little to say about mechanisms given the way they are commonly used. CONCLUSIONS The article ends with recommendations to guide research on mechanisms of therapeutic change.

Cognitive Problem-Solving Skills Training and Parent Management Training in the Treatment of Antisocial Behavior in Children

This study evaluated the effects of problem-solving skills training (PSST) and parent management training (PMT) on children (N = 97, ages 7-13 years) referred for severe antisocial behavior. Children and families were assigned randomly to 1 of 3 conditions: PSST, PMT, or PSST and PMT combined. It was predicted that (a) each treatment would improve child functioning (reduce overall deviance and aggressive, antisocial, and delinquent behavior, and increase prosocial competence); and (b) PSST and PMT combined would lead to more marked, pervasive, and durable changes in child functioning and greater changes in parent functioning (parental stress, depression, and overall symptoms). Expectations were supported by results at posttreatment and 1-year follow-up. PSST and PMT combined led to more marked changes in child and parent functioning and placed a greater proportion of youth within the range of nonclinic (normative) levels of functioning.

Parent management training: evidence, outcomes, and issues.

OBJECTIVE To describe and evaluate parent management training (PMT) as a treatment technique for oppositional, aggressive, and antisocial behavior. METHOD Recent research is reviewed on the efficacy of PMT; factors that contribute to treatment outcome; the range of outcomes related to child, parents, and family; and variations of treatment currently in use. Limitations are also discussed related to the impact of treatment, clinical application, and dissemination of treatment. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS PMT is one of the more well-investigated treatment techniques for children and adolescents. Notwithstanding the large number of controlled studies attesting to its efficacy, fundamental questions remain about the magnitude, scope, and durability of impact.

The meanings and measurement of clinical significance.

The previous articles in this special section make the case for the importance of evaluating the clinical significance of therapeutic change, present key measures and innovative ways in which they are applied, and more generally provide important guidelines for evaluating therapeutic change. Fundamental issues raised by the concept of clinical significance and the methods discussed in the previous articles serve as the basis of the present comments. Salient among these issues are ambiguities regarding the meaning of current measures of clinical significance, the importance of relating assessment of clinical significance to the goals of therapy, and evaluation of the construct(s) that clinical significance reflects. Research directions that are discussed include developing a typology of therapy goals, evaluating cutoff scores and thresholds for clinical significance, and attending to social as well as clinical impact of treatment.

Treatment integrity in psychotherapy research: Analysis of the studies and examination of the associated factors.

Treatment integrity refers to the degree to which an intervention is delivered as intended. Two studies evaluated the adequacy of treatment integrity procedures (including establishing, assessing, evaluating, and reporting integrity; therapist treatment adherence; and therapist competence) implemented in psychotherapy research, as well as predictors of their implementation. Randomized controlled trials of psychosocial interventions published in 6 influential psychological and psychiatric journals were reviewed and coded for treatment integrity implementation. Results indicate that investigations that systematically addressed treatment integrity procedures are virtually absent in the literature. Treatment integrity was adequately addressed for only 3.50% of the evaluated psychosocial interventions. Journal of publication and treatment approach predicted integrity implementation. Skill-building treatments (e.g., cognitive-behavioral) as compared with non-skill-building interventions (e.g., psychodynamic, nondirective counseling) were implemented with higher attention to integrity procedures. Guidelines for implementation of treatment integrity procedures need to be reevaluated.

Drawing Valid Inferences From Case Studies

Although the case study is usually accorded an important heuristic role, its limitations as a basis for drawing valid conclusions about the efficacy of treatment are widely recognized. The major problem with a case study is the ambiguity related to the precise influences that are responsible for change. Threats to internal validity, normally ruled out in experimentation, make ambiguous the basis for therapeutic change. However, case studies may vary along several dimensions that dictate the extent to which specific threats to internal validity are addressed. The present article discusses the possibility of conceptualizing and conducting cases in such a way as to maximize the likelihood that internally valid conclusions can be drawn. Although case studies can never replace experimentation, the scientific yield from case reports might be improved in clinical practice where methodological alternatives are unavailable.