Abstract
In an effort to provide suggestions about strategies for investigating the outcomes of psychosocial treatments in adult survivors of childhood sexual abuse, two broad approaches to psychotherapy outcome research are discussed: clinical trials methodologies and “naturalistic,” descriptive methodologies. Regardless of one's approach, the heuristic importance of “modelbuilding” and the need to be guided by theory are emphasized. The strengths and weaknesses of the two approaches are contrasted, and an example of an ongoing, naturalistic study of individual psychotherapy relying on attachment and interpersonal theories for its conceptual basis is provided. General methodological considerations that apply to both approaches (e.g., the need for control or comparison groups in any design, the need for longer term investigations) are discussed in conclusion.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
