Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

[Evaluation of paradoxical interventions]

H J Kern1

  • 1Universität Oldenburg.

Zeitschrift Fur Klinische Psychologie, Psychopathologie Und Psychotherapie
|January 1, 1993
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

[Paradoxical interventions: explanation and categorization].

Praxis der Kinderpsychologie und Kinderpsychiatrie·1994
Same author

The effects of fading, feedback, and feedback plus instruction on the performance of institutionalized retarded children in number retention exercise.

Psychologische Forschung·1972
Same author

[Molecular structure changes in chemical reactions. XXI. Deamination in the bicyclo (2,2,1)-heptane series].

Justus Liebigs Annalen der Chemie·1969
See all related articles

Anecdotal case reports on paradoxical interventions offer limited insights. Controlled studies and meta-analyses confirm efficacy, but not superiority, suggesting combined approaches may enhance results.

Area of Science:

  • Psychology
  • Clinical Psychology
  • Psychotherapy Research

Background:

  • Anecdotal case reports of paradoxical interventions often lack validity due to uncontrolled designs.
  • The impressive results reported in uncontrolled studies are limited in their usefulness for drawing firm conclusions.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate the scientific rigor and findings of studies on paradoxical interventions.
  • To identify the strengths and limitations of current research on paradoxical treatment efficacy.

Main Methods:

  • Review of uncontrolled case reports, controlled single-case experimental designs, group designs, and meta-analyses.
  • Assessment of the validity and generalizability of conclusions drawn from different study types.

Main Results:

Related Experiment Videos

  • Controlled designs and meta-analyses demonstrate the efficacy of paradoxical interventions.
  • Evidence does not support the general superiority of paradoxical interventions over other treatments.
  • Combining paradoxical and behavioral procedures appears to enhance treatment efficacy.

Conclusions:

  • While paradoxical interventions are effective, their superiority is not established.
  • Further research needs to detail specific interventions, ensure treatment integrity, and explore indications, client satisfaction, and ethical considerations.