Hostname: page-component-54dcc4c588-tfzs5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-03T17:40:01.779Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Meta-analysis of Comparative Therapy Outcome Studies: a Reply to Wilson

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 June 2009

David A. Shapiro  and
Diana Shapiro
David A. Shapiro
Affiliation:
MRC/SSRC Social and Applied Psychology Unit, University of Sheffield North Derbyshire Psychology Service
Diana Shapiro
Affiliation:
MRC/SSRC Social and Applied Psychology Unit, University of Sheffield North Derbyshire Psychology Service
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Wilson's recent critique of the authors' appraisal of meta-analysis appears to misunderstand them as claiming more for meta-analysis than they intended. The present paper seeks to clarify consequent confusions concerning selection of studies, the quality of the literature reviewed, the classification of therapies, and the non-identical results of different meta-analyses. It is acknowledged that no single meta-analysis is definitive.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy , Volume 10 , Issue 4 , October 1982 , pp. 307 - 310
Copyright
Copyright © British Association for Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapies 1982

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Agras, W. S., Kazdin, A. E. and Wilson, G. T. (1979). Behaviour Therapy: Toward An Applied Clinical Science. San Francisco: Freeman.Google Scholar
Andrews, G. and Harvey, R. (1981). Does psychotherapy benefit neurotic patients? A Reanalysis of the Smith, Glass and Miller data. Archives of General Psychiatry 38, 1203–1208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landman, J. T. and Dawes, R. M. (1982). Psychotherapy outcome: Smith and Glass's conclusions stand up under scrutiny. American Psychologist 37, 504–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rachman, S. and Wilson, G. T. (1980). The Effects of Psychological Therapy: Second Enlarged Edition. London: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Shapiro, D. A. (1981). Comparative credibility of treatment rationales: three tests of expectancy theory. British Journal of Clinical Psychology 20, 111–122.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shapiro, D. A. and Shapiro, D. (1982a). Meta-analysis of comparative therapy outcome research: a critical appraisal. Behavioural Psychotherapy 10, 4–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapiro, D. A. and Shapiro, D. (1982b). Meta-analysis of comparative therapy outcome studies: a replication and refinement. Psychological Bulletin (in press).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shapiro, D. A. and Shapiro, D. (1982c). Comparative therapy outcome research: methodological implications of meta-analysis. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology (in press).Google Scholar
Smith, M. L., Glass, G. V. and Miller, T. I. (1980). The Benefits of Psychotherapy. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, G. T. (1982). How useful is meta-analysis in evaluating the effects of different psychological therapies? Behavioural Psychotherapy 10, 221–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.