Developing a Systematic Framework for Utilizing Discrete Types of Qualitative Data as Therapy Research Evidence

Authors

  • Arthur C. Bohart Saybrook University
  • Makenna C. Berry Saybrook University
  • Carrie L. Wicks Saybrook University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14713/pcsp.v7i1.1076

Keywords:

Research Jury Method, adjudicated case study method, case law, psychotherapy process and outcome, case-specific changes, case studies, clinical case studies

Abstract

In a follow-up study on a "Research Jury Method" for qualitatively adjudicating statements about psychotherapy process and outcome (Bohart, Tallman, Byock, & Mackrill, 2011), the utility of 56 criteria for aiding jurors in analyzing a case history was examined. It was found that these criteria were useful in helping jurors identify aspects of the case that led to their conclusions. Utilizing the criteria also helped jurors adjudicate differences between them.

Author Biography

Arthur C. Bohart, Saybrook University

Aan Fishman, Ph.D. Editor-in-Chief, Pragmatic Case Studies in Psychotherapy Professor of Clinical and Organizational Psychology Graduate School of Applied and Professional Psychology Rutgers University Mailing address: 57 Jaffray Court Irvington, NY 10533 914-693-8549 fax: 603-917-2567 email: dfish96198@aol.com

Downloads

Published

2011-03-02

Issue

Vol. 7 No. 1 (2011)

Section

Arthur Bohart's "Research Jury Method"

License

Copyright for articles published in this journal is retained by the authors, with first publication rights granted to the journal. By virtue of their appearance in this open access journal, articles are free to use, with proper attribution, in educational and other non-commercial settings. The author has agreed to the journal's author's agreement.

Creative Commons License
All articles in this journal are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.