case study of counselling psychology

Writing a Counselling Case Study

As a counselling student, you may feel daunted when faced with writing your first counselling case study. Most training courses that qualify you as a counsellor or psychotherapist require you to complete case studies.

Before You Start Writing a Case Study

However good your case study, you won’t pass if you don’t meet the criteria set by your awarding body. So before you start writing, always check this, making sure that you have understood what is required.

For example, the ABC Level 4 Diploma in Therapeutic Counselling requires you to write two case studies as part of your external portfolio, to meet the following criteria:

• 4.2 Analyse the application of your own theoretical approach to your work with one client over a minimum of six sessions.
• 4.3 Evaluate the application of your own theoretical approach to your work with this client over a minimum of six sessions.
• 5.1 Analyse the learning gained from a minimum of two supervision sessions in relation to your work with one client.
• 5.2 Evaluate how this learning informed your work with this client over a minimum of two counselling sessions.

If you don’t meet these criteria exactly – for example, if you didn’t choose a client who you’d seen for enough sessions, if you described only one (rather than two) supervision sessions, or if you used the same client for both case studies – then you would get referred.

Check whether any more information is available on what your awarding body is looking for – e.g. ABC publishes regular ‘counselling exam summaries’ on its website; these provide valuable information on where recent students have gone wrong.

Selecting the Client

When you reflect on all the clients you have seen during training, you will no doubt realise that some clients are better suited to specific case studies than others. For example, you might have a client to whom you could easily apply your theoretical approach, and another where you gained real breakthroughs following your learning in supervision. These are good ones to choose.

Opening the Case Study

It’s usual to start your case study with a ‘pen portrait’ of the client – e.g. giving their age, gender and presenting issue. You might also like to describe how they seemed (in terms of both what they said and their body language) as they first entered the counselling room and during contracting.

If your agency uses assessment tools (e.g. CORE-10, WEMWBS, GAD-7, PHQ-9 etc.), you could say what your client scored at the start of therapy.

Free Handout Download

Writing a Case Study: 5 Tips

Describing the Client’s Counselling Journey

This is the part of the case study that varies greatly depending on what is required by the awarding body. Two common types of case study look at application of theory, and application of learning from supervision. Other possible types might examine ethics or self-awareness.

Theory-Based Case Studies

If you were doing the ABC Diploma mentioned above, then 4.1 would require you to break down the key concepts of the theoretical approach and examine each part in detail as it relates to practice. For example, in the case of congruence, you would need to explain why and how you used it with the client, and the result of this.

Meanwhile, 4.2 – the second part of this theory-based case study – would require you to assess the value and effectiveness of all the key concepts as you applied them to the same client, substantiating this with specific reasons. For example, you would continue with how effective and important congruence was in terms of the theoretical approach in practice, supporting this with reasoning.

In both, it would be important to structure the case study chronologically – that is, showing the flow of the counselling through at least six sessions rather than using the key concepts as headings.

Supervision-Based Case Studies

When writing supervision-based case studies (as required by ABC in their criteria 5.1 and 5.2, for example), it can be useful to use David Kolb’s learning cycle, which breaks down learning into four elements: concrete experience, reflective observation, abstract conceptualisation and active experimentation.

Rory Lees-Oakes has written a detailed guide on writing supervision case studies – entitled How to Analyse Supervision Case Studies. This is available to members of the Counselling Study Resource (CSR).

Closing Your Case Study

In conclusion, you could explain how the course of sessions ended, giving the client’s closing score (if applicable). You could also reflect on your own learning, and how you might approach things differently in future.

• Find My Rep

You are here

Case Study Research in Counselling and Psychotherapy

• John McLeod - University of Oslo, Norway
• Description

Case-based knowledge forms an essential element of the evidence base for counselling and psychotherapy practice. This book provides the reader with a unique introduction to the conceptual and practical tools required to conduct high quality case study research that is grounded in their own therapy practice or training. Drawing on real-life cases at the heart of counselling and psychotherapy practice, John McLeod makes complex debates and concepts engaging and accessible for the trainees and practitioners at all levels, and from all theoretical orientations. Key topics covered in the book include:

- the role of case studies in the development of theory, practice and policy in counselling and psychotherapy

- strategies for responding to moral and ethical issues in therapy case study research

- practical tools for collecting case data

- 'how-to-do-it' guides for carrying out different types of case study

- team-based case study research for practitioners and students

- questions, issues and challenges that may have been raised for readers through their study.

Concrete examples, points for reflection and discussion, and recommendations for further reading will enable readers to use the book as a basis for carrying out their own case investigation.

Comprehensive, passionate, right out at the growing edge of the psychotherapy research and even slightly beyond it, this book maps out where case study research has come from, what it looks like today, and what its future will look like.

Robert Elliott, Professor of Counselling, University of Strathclyde

This is an excellent book that has been needed by the counselling and psychotherapy profession for some considerable time. It has been worth the wait. John McLeod writes in a clearly accessible style easy to read and absorb and his comprehensive book both captures existing methods and identifies potential methods ripe for development.

Sue Wheeler, University of Leicester

This is an excellent book, and a very much needed addition to the case study methodology literature. It is very comprehensive and covers all aspects of case study methodology. The text addresses the issue intelligently, but is also an introduction for those engaging in case study research.

Mark Widdowson, Director of Training, CPTI Edinburgh

This book does an outstanding job in pulling together the crucially important literature on case studies in psychotherapy practice and research into a coherent, engaging and scholarly whole.

Daniel Fishman, Editor-in-Chief, Pragmatic Case Studies in Psychotherapy, Graduate School of Applied and Professional Psychology, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ, USA

McLeod covers in real depth and high quality how to complete case study research, would definitely recommend.

Always have enjoyed John McLeod's writing style ever since I first started training and this book has not disapointed me. My students have said they also find him easy to read and digest, brilliant.

A good book in preparing students how to conduct case study research in counselling and psychotherapy

Very good book that highlights the focus of counselling and psychotherapy using detailed case studies.

John McLeod writes with his usual high level of insight and accessibility in this fascinating book, which is a must for everyone interested in counselling research. The examples provided give a new way of exploring ideas and concepts. Well written throughout, this is a vital book for anyone in the field - practitioners and students alike.

Essential of considering doing case study research - recommended for those who are not yet sure re the method to use for their research

John McLeod has provided an essential reference for training the new generation of research savvy psychotherapists. This book brings more than just the "what" and "how" - it reveals credibility, rigour and dignity in human ways of researching human process to develop more humane practice and research.

This book adds a useful source for students with a particular interest in case study methodology. In particular Counselling students, who struggle with positivistic approaches, welcome such a clear text that puts their own pratice into an evidence-based context.

This is an excellent addition to support students conducting their own research study as part of their higher education training. It clearly helps them to navigate their way through the research process and the use of case study research for further development of counselling practice.

Preview this book

Sample materials & chapters.

Foreword by Daniel B. Fishman, Ph.D., Rutgers University

For instructors

Please select a format:

Select a Purchasing Option

• Electronic Order Options VitalSource Amazon Kindle Google Play eBooks.com Kobo

Related Products

SAGE Research Methods is a research methods tool created to help researchers, faculty and students with their research projects. SAGE Research Methods links over 175,000 pages of SAGE’s renowned book, journal and reference content with truly advanced search and discovery tools. Researchers can explore methods concepts to help them design research projects, understand particular methods or identify a new method, conduct their research, and write up their findings. Since SAGE Research Methods focuses on methodology rather than disciplines, it can be used across the social sciences, health sciences, and more.

With SAGE Research Methods, researchers can explore their chosen method across the depth and breadth of content, expanding or refining their search as needed; read online, print, or email full-text content; utilize suggested related methods and links to related authors from SAGE Research Methods' robust library and unique features; and even share their own collections of content through Methods Lists. SAGE Research Methods contains content from over 720 books, dictionaries, encyclopedias, and handbooks, the entire “Little Green Book,” and "Little Blue Book” series, two Major Works collating a selection of journal articles, and specially commissioned videos.

• Bipolar Disorder
• Therapy Center
• When To See a Therapist
• Types of Therapy
• Best Online Therapy
• Best Couples Therapy
• Best Family Therapy
• Managing Stress
• Sleep and Dreaming
• Understanding Emotions
• Self-Improvement
• Healthy Relationships
• Student Resources
• Personality Types
• Guided Meditations
• Verywell Mind Insights
• 2023 Verywell Mind 25
• Mental Health in the Classroom
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Review Board
• Crisis Support

What Is a Case Study?

Weighing the pros and cons of this method of research

Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

Cara Lustik is a fact-checker and copywriter.

Verywell / Colleen Tighe

• Pros and Cons

What Types of Case Studies Are Out There?

Where do you find data for a case study, how do i write a psychology case study.

A case study is an in-depth study of one person, group, or event. In a case study, nearly every aspect of the subject's life and history is analyzed to seek patterns and causes of behavior. Case studies can be used in many different fields, including psychology, medicine, education, anthropology, political science, and social work.

The point of a case study is to learn as much as possible about an individual or group so that the information can be generalized to many others. Unfortunately, case studies tend to be highly subjective, and it is sometimes difficult to generalize results to a larger population.

While case studies focus on a single individual or group, they follow a format similar to other types of psychology writing. If you are writing a case study, we got you—here are some rules of APA format to reference.  

At a Glance

A case study, or an in-depth study of a person, group, or event, can be a useful research tool when used wisely. In many cases, case studies are best used in situations where it would be difficult or impossible for you to conduct an experiment. They are helpful for looking at unique situations and allow researchers to gather a lot of˜ information about a specific individual or group of people. However, it's important to be cautious of any bias we draw from them as they are highly subjective.

What Are the Benefits and Limitations of Case Studies?

A case study can have its strengths and weaknesses. Researchers must consider these pros and cons before deciding if this type of study is appropriate for their needs.

One of the greatest advantages of a case study is that it allows researchers to investigate things that are often difficult or impossible to replicate in a lab. Some other benefits of a case study:

• Allows researchers to capture information on the 'how,' 'what,' and 'why,' of something that's implemented
• Gives researchers the chance to collect information on why one strategy might be chosen over another
• Permits researchers to develop hypotheses that can be explored in experimental research

On the other hand, a case study can have some drawbacks:

• It cannot necessarily be generalized to the larger population
• Cannot demonstrate cause and effect
• It may not be scientifically rigorous
• It can lead to bias

Researchers may choose to perform a case study if they want to explore a unique or recently discovered phenomenon. Through their insights, researchers develop additional ideas and study questions that might be explored in future studies.

It's important to remember that the insights from case studies cannot be used to determine cause-and-effect relationships between variables. However, case studies may be used to develop hypotheses that can then be addressed in experimental research.

Case Study Examples

There have been a number of notable case studies in the history of psychology. Much of  Freud's work and theories were developed through individual case studies. Some great examples of case studies in psychology include:

• Anna O : Anna O. was a pseudonym of a woman named Bertha Pappenheim, a patient of a physician named Josef Breuer. While she was never a patient of Freud's, Freud and Breuer discussed her case extensively. The woman was experiencing symptoms of a condition that was then known as hysteria and found that talking about her problems helped relieve her symptoms. Her case played an important part in the development of talk therapy as an approach to mental health treatment.
• Phineas Gage : Phineas Gage was a railroad employee who experienced a terrible accident in which an explosion sent a metal rod through his skull, damaging important portions of his brain. Gage recovered from his accident but was left with serious changes in both personality and behavior.
• Genie : Genie was a young girl subjected to horrific abuse and isolation. The case study of Genie allowed researchers to study whether language learning was possible, even after missing critical periods for language development. Her case also served as an example of how scientific research may interfere with treatment and lead to further abuse of vulnerable individuals.

Such cases demonstrate how case research can be used to study things that researchers could not replicate in experimental settings. In Genie's case, her horrific abuse denied her the opportunity to learn a language at critical points in her development.

This is clearly not something researchers could ethically replicate, but conducting a case study on Genie allowed researchers to study phenomena that are otherwise impossible to reproduce.

There are a few different types of case studies that psychologists and other researchers might use:

• Collective case studies : These involve studying a group of individuals. Researchers might study a group of people in a certain setting or look at an entire community. For example, psychologists might explore how access to resources in a community has affected the collective mental well-being of those who live there.
• Descriptive case studies : These involve starting with a descriptive theory. The subjects are then observed, and the information gathered is compared to the pre-existing theory.
• Explanatory case studies : These   are often used to do causal investigations. In other words, researchers are interested in looking at factors that may have caused certain things to occur.
• Exploratory case studies : These are sometimes used as a prelude to further, more in-depth research. This allows researchers to gather more information before developing their research questions and hypotheses .
• Instrumental case studies : These occur when the individual or group allows researchers to understand more than what is initially obvious to observers.
• Intrinsic case studies : This type of case study is when the researcher has a personal interest in the case. Jean Piaget's observations of his own children are good examples of how an intrinsic case study can contribute to the development of a psychological theory.

The three main case study types often used are intrinsic, instrumental, and collective. Intrinsic case studies are useful for learning about unique cases. Instrumental case studies help look at an individual to learn more about a broader issue. A collective case study can be useful for looking at several cases simultaneously.

The type of case study that psychology researchers use depends on the unique characteristics of the situation and the case itself.

There are a number of different sources and methods that researchers can use to gather information about an individual or group. Six major sources that have been identified by researchers are:

• Archival records : Census records, survey records, and name lists are examples of archival records.
• Direct observation : This strategy involves observing the subject, often in a natural setting . While an individual observer is sometimes used, it is more common to utilize a group of observers.
• Documents : Letters, newspaper articles, administrative records, etc., are the types of documents often used as sources.
• Interviews : Interviews are one of the most important methods for gathering information in case studies. An interview can involve structured survey questions or more open-ended questions.
• Participant observation : When the researcher serves as a participant in events and observes the actions and outcomes, it is called participant observation.
• Physical artifacts : Tools, objects, instruments, and other artifacts are often observed during a direct observation of the subject.

If you have been directed to write a case study for a psychology course, be sure to check with your instructor for any specific guidelines you need to follow. If you are writing your case study for a professional publication, check with the publisher for their specific guidelines for submitting a case study.

Here is a general outline of what should be included in a case study.

Section 1: A Case History

This section will have the following structure and content:

Background information : The first section of your paper will present your client's background. Include factors such as age, gender, work, health status, family mental health history, family and social relationships, drug and alcohol history, life difficulties, goals, and coping skills and weaknesses.

Description of the presenting problem : In the next section of your case study, you will describe the problem or symptoms that the client presented with.

Describe any physical, emotional, or sensory symptoms reported by the client. Thoughts, feelings, and perceptions related to the symptoms should also be noted. Any screening or diagnostic assessments that are used should also be described in detail and all scores reported.

Your diagnosis : Provide your diagnosis and give the appropriate Diagnostic and Statistical Manual code. Explain how you reached your diagnosis, how the client's symptoms fit the diagnostic criteria for the disorder(s), or any possible difficulties in reaching a diagnosis.

Section 2: Treatment Plan

This portion of the paper will address the chosen treatment for the condition. This might also include the theoretical basis for the chosen treatment or any other evidence that might exist to support why this approach was chosen.

• Cognitive behavioral approach : Explain how a cognitive behavioral therapist would approach treatment. Offer background information on cognitive behavioral therapy and describe the treatment sessions, client response, and outcome of this type of treatment. Make note of any difficulties or successes encountered by your client during treatment.
• Humanistic approach : Describe a humanistic approach that could be used to treat your client, such as client-centered therapy . Provide information on the type of treatment you chose, the client's reaction to the treatment, and the end result of this approach. Explain why the treatment was successful or unsuccessful.
• Psychoanalytic approach : Describe how a psychoanalytic therapist would view the client's problem. Provide some background on the psychoanalytic approach and cite relevant references. Explain how psychoanalytic therapy would be used to treat the client, how the client would respond to therapy, and the effectiveness of this treatment approach.
• Pharmacological approach : If treatment primarily involves the use of medications, explain which medications were used and why. Provide background on the effectiveness of these medications and how monotherapy may compare with an approach that combines medications with therapy or other treatments.

This section of a case study should also include information about the treatment goals, process, and outcomes.

When you are writing a case study, you should also include a section where you discuss the case study itself, including the strengths and limitiations of the study. You should note how the findings of your case study might support previous research. 

In your discussion section, you should also describe some of the implications of your case study. What ideas or findings might require further exploration? How might researchers go about exploring some of these questions in additional studies?

Need More Tips?

Here are a few additional pointers to keep in mind when formatting your case study:

• Never refer to the subject of your case study as "the client." Instead, use their name or a pseudonym.
• Read examples of case studies to gain an idea about the style and format.
• Remember to use APA format when citing references .

Crowe S, Cresswell K, Robertson A, Huby G, Avery A, Sheikh A. The case study approach .  BMC Med Res Methodol . 2011;11:100.

Crowe S, Cresswell K, Robertson A, Huby G, Avery A, Sheikh A. The case study approach . BMC Med Res Methodol . 2011 Jun 27;11:100. doi:10.1186/1471-2288-11-100

Gagnon, Yves-Chantal.  The Case Study as Research Method: A Practical Handbook . Canada, Chicago Review Press Incorporated DBA Independent Pub Group, 2010.

Yin, Robert K. Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods . United States, SAGE Publications, 2017.

By Kendra Cherry, MSEd Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Psicol Reflex Crit
• v.34; 2021 Dec

Appraising psychotherapy case studies in practice-based evidence: introducing Case Study Evaluation-tool (CaSE)

Greta kaluzeviciute.

Department of Psychosocial and Psychoanalytic Studies, University of Essex, Wivenhoe Park, Colchester, CO4 3SQ UK

Associated Data

Not applicable.

Systematic case studies are often placed at the low end of evidence-based practice (EBP) due to lack of critical appraisal. This paper seeks to attend to this research gap by introducing a novel Case Study Evaluation-tool (CaSE). First, issues around knowledge generation and validity are assessed in both EBP and practice-based evidence (PBE) paradigms. Although systematic case studies are more aligned with PBE paradigm, the paper argues for a complimentary, third way approach between the two paradigms and their ‘exemplary’ methodologies: case studies and randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Second, the paper argues that all forms of research can produce ‘valid evidence’ but the validity itself needs to be assessed against each specific research method and purpose. Existing appraisal tools for qualitative research (JBI, CASP, ETQS) are shown to have limited relevance for the appraisal of systematic case studies through a comparative tool assessment. Third, the paper develops purpose-oriented evaluation criteria for systematic case studies through CaSE Checklist for Essential Components in Systematic Case Studies and CaSE Purpose-based Evaluative Framework for Systematic Case Studies. The checklist approach aids reviewers in assessing the presence or absence of essential case study components (internal validity). The framework approach aims to assess the effectiveness of each case against its set out research objectives and aims (external validity), based on different systematic case study purposes in psychotherapy. Finally, the paper demonstrates the application of the tool with a case example and notes further research trajectories for the development of CaSE tool.

Introduction

Due to growing demands of evidence-based practice, standardised research assessment and appraisal tools have become common in healthcare and clinical treatment (Hannes, Lockwood, & Pearson, 2010 ; Hartling, Chisholm, Thomson, & Dryden, 2012 ; Katrak, Bialocerkowski, Massy-Westropp, Kumar, & Grimmer, 2004 ). This allows researchers to critically appraise research findings on the basis of their validity, results, and usefulness (Hill & Spittlehouse, 2003 ). Despite the upsurge of critical appraisal in qualitative research (Williams, Boylan, & Nunan, 2019 ), there are no assessment or appraisal tools designed for psychotherapy case studies.

Although not without controversies (Michels, 2000 ), case studies remain central to the investigation of psychotherapy processes (Midgley, 2006 ; Willemsen, Della Rosa, & Kegerreis, 2017 ). This is particularly true of systematic case studies, the most common form of case study in contemporary psychotherapy research (Davison & Lazarus, 2007 ; McLeod & Elliott, 2011 ).

Unlike the classic clinical case study, systematic cases usually involve a team of researchers, who gather data from multiple different sources (e.g., questionnaires, observations by the therapist, interviews, statistical findings, clinical assessment, etc.), and involve a rigorous data triangulation process to assess whether the data from different sources converge (McLeod, 2010 ). Since systematic case studies are methodologically pluralistic, they have a greater interest in situating patients within the study of a broader population than clinical case studies (Iwakabe & Gazzola, 2009 ). Systematic case studies are considered to be an accessible method for developing research evidence-base in psychotherapy (Widdowson, 2011 ), especially since they correct some of the methodological limitations (e.g. lack of ‘third party’ perspectives and bias in data analysis) inherent to classic clinical case studies (Iwakabe & Gazzola, 2009 ). They have been used for the purposes of clinical training (Tuckett, 2008 ), outcome assessment (Hilliard, 1993 ), development of clinical techniques (Almond, 2004 ) and meta-analysis of qualitative findings (Timulak, 2009 ). All these developments signal a revived interest in the case study method, but also point to the obvious lack of a research assessment tool suitable for case studies in psychotherapy (Table ​ (Table1 1 ).

Key concept: systematic case study

To attend to this research gap, this paper first reviews issues around the conceptualisation of validity within the paradigms of evidence-based practice (EBP) and practice-based evidence (PBE). Although case studies are often positioned at the low end of EBP (Aveline, 2005 ), the paper suggests that systematic cases are a valuable form of evidence, capable of complimenting large-scale studies such as randomised controlled trials (RCTs). However, there remains a difficulty in assessing the quality and relevance of case study findings to broader psychotherapy research.

As a way forward, the paper introduces a novel Case Study Evaluation-tool (CaSE) in the form of CaSE Purpose - based Evaluative Framework for Systematic Case Studies and CaSE Checklist for Essential Components in Systematic Case Studies . The long-term development of CaSE would contribute to psychotherapy research and practice in three ways.

Given the significance of methodological pluralism and diverse research aims in systematic case studies, CaSE will not seek to prescribe explicit case study writing guidelines, which has already been done by numerous authors (McLeod, 2010 ; Meganck, Inslegers, Krivzov, & Notaerts, 2017 ; Willemsen et al., 2017 ). Instead, CaSE will enable the retrospective assessment of systematic case study findings and their relevance (or lack thereof) to broader psychotherapy research and practice. However, there is no reason to assume that CaSE cannot be used prospectively (i.e. producing systematic case studies in accordance to CaSE evaluative framework, as per point 3 in Table ​ Table2 2 ).

How can Case Study Evaluation-tool (CaSE) be used in psychotherapy research and practice?

The development of a research assessment or appraisal tool is a lengthy, ongoing process (Long & Godfrey, 2004 ). It is particularly challenging to develop a comprehensive purpose - oriented evaluative framework, suitable for the assessment of diverse methodologies, aims and outcomes. As such, this paper should be treated as an introduction to the broader development of CaSE tool. It will introduce the rationale behind CaSE and lay out its main approach to evidence and evaluation, with further development in mind. A case example from the Single Case Archive (SCA) ( https://singlecasearchive.com ) will be used to demonstrate the application of the tool ‘in action’. The paper notes further research trajectories and discusses some of the limitations around the use of the tool.

Separating the wheat from the chaff: what is and is not evidence in psychotherapy (and who gets to decide?)

The common approach: evidence-based practice.

In the last two decades, psychotherapy has become increasingly centred around the idea of an evidence-based practice (EBP). Initially introduced in medicine, EBP has been defined as ‘conscientious, explicit and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions about the care of individual patients’ (Sackett, Rosenberg, Gray, Haynes, & Richardson, 1996 ). EBP revolves around efficacy research: it seeks to examine whether a specific intervention has a causal (in this case, measurable) effect on clinical populations (Barkham & Mellor-Clark, 2003 ). From a conceptual standpoint, Sackett and colleagues defined EBP as a paradigm that is inclusive of many methodologies, so long as they contribute towards clinical decision-making process and accumulation of best currently available evidence in any given set of circumstances (Gabbay & le May, 2011 ). Similarly, the American Psychological Association (APA, 2010 ) has recently issued calls for evidence-based systematic case studies in order to produce standardised measures for evaluating process and outcome data across different therapeutic modalities.

However, given EBP’s focus on establishing cause-and-effect relationships (Rosqvist, Thomas, & Truax, 2011 ), it is unsurprising that qualitative research is generally not considered to be ‘gold standard’ or ‘efficacious’ within this paradigm (Aveline, 2005 ; Cartwright & Hardie, 2012 ; Edwards, 2013 ; Edwards, Dattilio, & Bromley, 2004 ; Longhofer, Floersch, & Hartmann, 2017 ). Qualitative methods like systematic case studies maintain an appreciation for context, complexity and meaning making. Therefore, instead of measuring regularly occurring causal relations (as in quantitative studies), the focus is on studying complex social phenomena (e.g. relationships, events, experiences, feelings, etc.) (Erickson, 2012 ; Maxwell, 2004 ). Edwards ( 2013 ) points out that, although context-based research in systematic case studies is the bedrock of psychotherapy theory and practice, it has also become shrouded by an unfortunate ideological description: ‘anecdotal’ case studies (i.e. unscientific narratives lacking evidence, as opposed to ‘gold standard’ evidence, a term often used to describe the RCT method and the therapeutic modalities supported by it), leading to a further need for advocacy in and defence of the unique epistemic process involved in case study research (Fishman, Messer, Edwards, & Dattilio, 2017 ).

The EBP paradigm prioritises the quantitative approach to causality, most notably through its focus on high generalisability and the ability to deal with bias through randomisation process. These conditions are associated with randomised controlled trials (RCTs) but are limited (or, as some argue, impossible) in qualitative research methods such as the case study (Margison et al., 2000 ) (Table ​ (Table3 3 ).

Key concept: evidence-based practice (EBP)

‘Evidence’ from an EBP standpoint hovers over the epistemological assumption of procedural objectivity : knowledge can be generated in a standardised, non-erroneous way, thus producing objective (i.e. with minimised bias) data. This can be achieved by anyone, as long as they are able to perform the methodological procedure (e.g. RCT) appropriately, in a ‘clearly defined and accepted process that assists with knowledge production’ (Douglas, 2004 , p. 131). If there is a well-outlined quantitative form for knowledge production, the same outcome should be achieved regardless of who processes or interprets the information. For example, researchers using Cochrane Review assess the strength of evidence using meticulously controlled and scrupulous techniques; in turn, this minimises individual judgment and creates unanimity of outcomes across different groups of people (Gabbay & le May, 2011 ). The typical process of knowledge generation (through employing RCTs and procedural objectivity) in EBP is demonstrated in Fig. ​ Fig.1 1 .

Typical knowledge generation process in evidence–based practice (EBP)

In EBP, the concept of validity remains somewhat controversial, with many critics stating that it limits rather than strengthens knowledge generation (Berg, 2019 ; Berg & Slaattelid, 2017 ; Lilienfeld, Ritschel, Lynn, Cautin, & Latzman, 2013 ). This is because efficacy research relies on internal validity . At a general level, this concept refers to the congruence between the research study and the research findings (i.e. the research findings were not influenced by anything external to the study, such as confounding variables, methodological errors and bias); at a more specific level, internal validity determines the extent to which a study establishes a reliable causal relationship between an independent variable (e.g. treatment) and independent variable (outcome or effect) (Margison et al., 2000 ). This approach to validity is demonstrated in Fig. ​ Fig.2 2 .

Internal validity

Social scientists have argued that there is a trade-off between research rigour and generalisability: the more specific the sample and the more rigorously defined the intervention, the outcome is likely to be less applicable to everyday, routine practice. As such, there remains a tension between employing procedural objectivity which increases the rigour of research outcomes and applying such outcomes to routine psychotherapy practice where scientific standards of evidence are not uniform.

According to McLeod ( 2002 ), inability to address questions that are most relevant for practitioners contributed to a deepening research–practice divide in psychotherapy. Studies investigating how practitioners make clinical decisions and the kinds of evidence they refer to show that there is a strong preference for knowledge that is not generated procedurally, i.e. knowledge that encompasses concrete clinical situations, experiences and techniques. A study by Stewart and Chambless ( 2007 ) sought to assess how a larger population of clinicians (under APA, from varying clinical schools of thought and independent practices, sample size 591) make treatment decisions in private practice. The study found that large-scale statistical data was not the primary source of information sought by clinicians. The most important influences were identified as past clinical experiences and clinical expertise ( M = 5.62). Treatment materials based on clinical case observations and theory ( M = 4.72) were used almost as frequently as psychotherapy outcome research findings ( M = 4.80) (i.e. evidence-based research). These numbers are likely to fluctuate across different forms of psychotherapy; however, they are indicative of the need for research about routine clinical settings that does not isolate or generalise the effect of an intervention but examines the variations in psychotherapy processes.

The alternative approach: practice-based evidence

In an attempt to dissolve or lessen the research–practice divide, an alternative paradigm of practice-based evidence (PBE) has been suggested (Barkham & Mellor-Clark, 2003 ; Fox, 2003 ; Green & Latchford, 2012 ; Iwakabe & Gazzola, 2009 ; Laska, Motulsky, Wertz, Morrow, & Ponterotto, 2014 ; Margison et al., 2000 ). PBE represents a shift in how we think about evidence and knowledge generation in psychotherapy. PBE treats research as a local and contingent process (at least initially), which means it focuses on variations (e.g. in patient symptoms) and complexities (e.g. of clinical setting) in the studied phenomena (Fox, 2003 ). Moreover, research and theory-building are seen as complementary rather than detached activities from clinical practice. That is to say, PBE seeks to examine how and which treatments can be improved in everyday clinical practice by flagging up clinically salient issues and developing clinical techniques (Barkham & Mellor-Clark, 2003 ). For this reason, PBE is concerned with the effectiveness of research findings: it evaluates how well interventions work in real-world settings (Rosqvist et al., 2011 ). Therefore, although it is not unlikely for RCTs to be used in order to generate practice-informed evidence (Horn & Gassaway, 2007 ), qualitative methods like the systematic case study are seen as ideal for demonstrating the effectiveness of therapeutic interventions with individual patients (van Hennik, 2020 ) (Table ​ (Table4 4 ).

Key concept: practice-based evidence (PBE)

PBE’s epistemological approach to ‘evidence’ may be understood through the process of concordant objectivity (Douglas, 2004 ): ‘Instead of seeking to eliminate individual judgment, … [concordant objectivity] checks to see whether the individual judgments of people in fact do agree’ (p. 462). This does not mean that anyone can contribute to the evaluation process like in procedural objectivity, where the main criterion is following a set quantitative protocol or knowing how to operate a specific research design. Concordant objectivity requires that there is a set of competent observers who are closely familiar with the studied phenomenon (e.g. researchers and practitioners who are familiar with depression from a variety of therapeutic approaches).

Systematic case studies are a good example of PBE ‘in action’: they allow for the examination of detailed unfolding of events in psychotherapy practice, making it the most pragmatic and practice-oriented form of psychotherapy research (Fishman, 1999 , 2005 ). Furthermore, systematic case studies approach evidence and results through concordant objectivity (Douglas, 2004 ) by involving a team of researchers and rigorous data triangulation processes (McLeod, 2010 ). This means that, although systematic case studies remain focused on particular clinical situations and detailed subjective experiences (similar to classic clinical case studies; see Iwakabe & Gazzola, 2009 ), they still involve a series of validity checks and considerations on how findings from a single systematic case pertain to broader psychotherapy research (Fishman, 2005 ). The typical process of knowledge generation (through employing systematic case studies and concordant objectivity) in PBE is demonstrated in Fig. ​ Fig.3. 3 . The figure exemplifies a bidirectional approach to research and practice, which includes the development of research-supported psychological treatments (through systematic reviews of existing evidence) as well as the perspectives of clinical practitioners in the research process (through the study of local and contingent patient and/or treatment processes) (Teachman et al., 2012 ; Westen, Novotny, & Thompson-Brenner, 2004 ).

Typical knowledge generation process in practice-based evidence (PBE)

From a PBE standpoint, external validity is a desirable research condition: it measures extent to which the impact of interventions apply to real patients and therapists in everyday clinical settings. As such, external validity is not based on the strength of causal relationships between treatment interventions and outcomes (as in internal validity); instead, the use of specific therapeutic techniques and problem-solving decisions are considered to be important for generalising findings onto routine clinical practice (even if the findings are explicated from a single case study; see Aveline, 2005 ). This approach to validity is demonstrated in Fig. ​ Fig.4 4 .

External validity

Since effectiveness research is less focused on limiting the context of the studied phenomenon (indeed, explicating the context is often one of the research aims), there is more potential for confounding factors (e.g. bias and uncontrolled variables) which in turn can reduce the study’s internal validity (Barkham & Mellor-Clark, 2003 ). This is also an important challenge for research appraisal. Douglas ( 2004 ) argues that appraising research in terms of its effectiveness may produce significant disagreements or group illusions, since what might work for some practitioners may not work for others: ‘It cannot guarantee that values are not influencing or supplanting reasoning; the observers may have shared values that cause them to all disregard important aspects of an event’ (Douglas, 2004 , p. 462). Douglas further proposes that an interactive approach to objectivity may be employed as a more complex process in debating the evidential quality of a research study: it requires a discussion among observers and evaluators in the form of peer-review, scientific discourse, as well as research appraisal tools and instruments. While these processes of rigour are also applied in EBP, there appears to be much more space for debate, disagreement and interpretation in PBE’s approach to research evaluation, partly because the evaluation criteria themselves are subject of methodological debate and are often employed in different ways by researchers (Williams et al., 2019 ). This issue will be addressed more explicitly again in relation to CaSE development (‘Developing purpose-oriented evaluation criteria for systematic case studies’ section).

A third way approach to validity and evidence

The research–practice divide shows us that there may be something significant in establishing complementarity between EBP and PBE rather than treating them as mutually exclusive forms of research (Fishman et al., 2017 ). For one, EBP is not a sufficient condition for delivering research relevant to practice settings (Bower, 2003 ). While RCTs can demonstrate that an intervention works on average in a group, clinicians who are facing individual patients need to answer a different question: how can I make therapy work with this particular case ? (Cartwright & Hardie, 2012 ). Systematic case studies are ideal for filling this gap: they contain descriptions of microprocesses (e.g. patient symptoms, therapeutic relationships, therapist attitudes) in psychotherapy practice that are often overlooked in large-scale RCTs (Iwakabe & Gazzola, 2009 ). In particular, systematic case studies describing the use of specific interventions with less researched psychological conditions (e.g. childhood depression or complex post-traumatic stress disorder) can deepen practitioners’ understanding of effective clinical techniques before the results of large-scale outcome studies are disseminated.

Secondly, establishing a working relationship between systematic case studies and RCTs will contribute towards a more pragmatic understanding of validity in psychotherapy research. Indeed, the very tension and so-called trade-off between internal and external validity is based on the assumption that research methods are designed on an either/or basis; either they provide a sufficiently rigorous study design or they produce findings that can be applied to real-life practice. Jimenez-Buedo and Miller ( 2010 ) call this assumption into question: in their view, if a study is not internally valid, then ‘little, or rather nothing, can be said of the outside world’ (p. 302). In this sense, internal validity may be seen as a pre-requisite for any form of applied research and its external validity, but it need not be constrained to the quantitative approach of causality. For example, Levitt, Motulsky, Wertz, Morrow, and Ponterotto ( 2017 ) argue that, what is typically conceptualised as internal validity, is, in fact, a much broader construct, involving the assessment of how the research method (whether qualitative or quantitative) is best suited for the research goal, and whether it obtains the relevant conclusions. Similarly, Truijens, Cornelis, Desmet, and De Smet ( 2019 ) suggest that we should think about validity in a broader epistemic sense—not just in terms of psychometric measures, but also in terms of the research design, procedure, goals (research questions), approaches to inquiry (paradigms, epistemological assumptions), etc.

The overarching argument from research cited above is that all forms of research—qualitative and quantitative—can produce ‘valid evidence’ but the validity itself needs to be assessed against each specific research method and purpose. For example, RCTs are accompanied with a variety of clearly outlined appraisal tools and instruments such as CASP (Critical Appraisal Skills Programme) that are well suited for the assessment of RCT validity and their implications for EBP. Systematic case studies (or case studies more generally) currently have no appraisal tools in any discipline. The next section evaluates whether existing qualitative research appraisal tools are relevant for systematic case studies in psychotherapy and specifies the missing evaluative criteria.

The relevance of existing appraisal tools for qualitative research to systematic case studies in psychotherapy

What is a research tool.

Currently, there are several research appraisal tools, checklists and frameworks for qualitative studies. It is important to note that tools, checklists and frameworks are not equivalent to one another but actually refer to different approaches to appraising the validity of a research study. As such, it is erroneous to assume that all forms of qualitative appraisal feature the same aims and methods (Hannes et al., 2010 ; Williams et al., 2019 ).

Generally, research assessment falls into two categories: checklists and frameworks . Checklist approaches are often contrasted with quantitative research, since the focus is on assessing the internal validity of research (i.e. researcher’s independence from the study). This involves the assessment of bias in sampling, participant recruitment, data collection and analysis. Framework approaches to research appraisal, on the other hand, revolve around traditional qualitative concepts such as transparency, reflexivity, dependability and transferability (Williams et al., 2019 ). Framework approaches to appraisal are often challenging to use because they depend on the reviewer’s familiarisation and interpretation of the qualitative concepts.

Because of these different approaches, there is some ambiguity in terminology, particularly between research appraisal instruments and research appraisal tools . These terms are often used interchangeably in appraisal literature (Williams et al., 2019 ). In this paper, research appraisal tool is defined as a method-specific (i.e. it identifies a specific research method or component) form of appraisal that draws from both checklist and framework approaches. Furthermore, a research appraisal tool seeks to inform decision making in EBP or PBE paradigms and provides explicit definitions of the tool’s evaluative framework (thus minimising—but by no means eliminating—the reviewers’ interpretation of the tool). This definition will be applied to CaSE (Table ​ (Table5 5 ).

Key concept: research appraisal tool

In contrast, research appraisal instruments are generally seen as a broader form of appraisal in the sense that they may evaluate a variety of methods (i.e. they are non-method specific or they do not target a particular research component), and are aimed at checking whether the research findings and/or the study design contain specific elements (e.g. the aims of research, the rationale behind design methodology, participant recruitment strategies, etc.).

There is often an implicit difference in audience between appraisal tools and instruments. Research appraisal instruments are often aimed at researchers who want to assess the strength of their study; however, the process of appraisal may not be made explicit in the study itself (besides mentioning that the tool was used to appraise the study). Research appraisal tools are aimed at researchers who wish to explicitly demonstrate the evidential quality of the study to the readers (which is particularly common in RCTs). All forms of appraisal used in the comparative exercise below are defined as ‘tools’, even though they have different appraisal approaches and aims.

Comparing different qualitative tools

Hannes et al. ( 2010 ) identified CASP (Critical Appraisal Skills Programme-tool), JBI (Joanna Briggs Institute-tool) and ETQS (Evaluation Tool for Qualitative Studies) as the most frequently used critical appraisal tools by qualitative researchers. All three instruments are available online and are free of charge, which means that any researcher or reviewer can readily utilise CASP, JBI or ETQS evaluative frameworks to their research. Furthermore, all three instruments were developed within the context of organisational, institutional or consortium support (Tables ​ (Tables6, 6 , ​ ,7 7 and ​ and8 8 ).

CASP (Critical Appraisal Skills Programme-tool)

JBI (Joanna Briggs Institute-tool)

ETQS (Evaluation Tool for Qualitative Studies)

It is important to note that neither of the three tools is specific to systematic case studies or psychotherapy case studies (which would include not only systematic but also experimental and clinical cases). This means that using CASP, JBI or ETQS for case study appraisal may come at a cost of overlooking elements and components specific to the systematic case study method.

Based on Hannes et al. ( 2010 ) comparative study of qualitative appraisal tools as well as the different evaluation criteria explicated in CASP, JBI and ETQS evaluative frameworks, I assessed how well each of the three tools is attuned to the methodological , clinical and theoretical aspects of systematic case studies in psychotherapy. The latter components were based on case study guidelines featured in the journal of Pragmatic Case Studies in Psychotherapy as well as components commonly used by published systematic case studies across a variety of other psychotherapy journals (e.g. Psychotherapy Research , Research In Psychotherapy : Psychopathology Process And Outcome , etc.) (see Table ​ Table9 9 for detailed descriptions of each component).

Comparing the relevance of JBI (Joanna Briggs Institute), CASP (Critical Appraisal Skills Program) and ETQS (Evaluation Tool for Qualitative Studies) for appraising components specific to systematic case studies

The evaluation criteria for each tool in Table ​ Table9 9 follows Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) ( 2017a , 2017b ); Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) ( 2018 ); and ETQS Questionnaire (first published in 2004 but revised continuously since). Table ​ Table10 10 demonstrates how each tool should be used (i.e. recommended reviewer responses to checklists and questionnaires).

Recommended reviewer responses to JBI (Joanna Briggs Institute), CASP (Critical Appraisal Skills Program) and ETQS (Evaluation Tool for Qualitative Studies)

Using CASP, JBI and ETQS for systematic case study appraisal

Although JBI, CASP and ETQS were all developed to appraise qualitative research, it is evident from the above comparison that there are significant differences between the three tools. For example, JBI and ETQS are well suited to assess researcher’s interpretations (Hannes et al. ( 2010 ) defined this as interpretive validity , a subcategory of internal validity ): the researcher’s ability to portray, understand and reflect on the research participants’ experiences, thoughts, viewpoints and intentions. JBI has an explicit requirement for participant voices to be clearly represented, whereas ETQS involves a set of questions about key characteristics of events, persons, times and settings that are relevant to the study. Furthermore, both JBI and ETQS seek to assess the researcher’s influence on the research, with ETQS particularly focusing on the evaluation of reflexivity (the researcher’s personal influence on the interpretation and collection of data). These elements are absent or addressed to a lesser extent in the CASP tool.

The appraisal of transferability of findings (what this paper previously referred to as external validity ) is addressed only by ETQS and CASP. Both tools have detailed questions about the value of research to practice and policy as well as its transferability to other populations and settings. Methodological research aspects are also extensively addressed by CASP and ETQS, but less so by JBI (which relies predominantly on congruity between research methodology and objectives without any particular assessment criteria for other data sources and/or data collection methods). Finally, the evaluation of theoretical aspects (referred to by Hannes et al. ( 2010 ) as theoretical validity ) is addressed only by JBI and ETQS; there are no assessment criteria for theoretical framework in CASP.

Given these differences, it is unsurprising that CASP, JBI and ETQS have limited relevance for systematic case studies in psychotherapy. First, it is evident that neither of the three tools has specific evaluative criteria for the clinical component of systematic case studies. Although JBI and ETQS feature some relevant questions about participants and their context, the conceptualisation of patients (and/or clients) in psychotherapy involves other kinds of data elements (e.g. diagnostic tools and questionnaires as well as therapist observations) that go beyond the usual participant data. Furthermore, much of the clinical data is intertwined with the therapist’s clinical decision-making and thinking style (Kaluzeviciute & Willemsen, 2020 ). As such, there is a need to appraise patient data and therapist interpretations not only on a separate basis, but also as two forms of knowledge that are deeply intertwined in the case narrative.

Secondly, since systematic case studies involve various forms of data, there is a need to appraise how these data converge (or how different methods complement one another in the case context) and how they can be transferred or applied in broader psychotherapy research and practice. These systematic case study components are attended to a degree by CASP (which is particularly attentive of methodological components) and ETQS (particularly specific criteria for research transferability onto policy and practice). These components are not addressed or less explicitly addressed by JBI. Overall, neither of the tools is attuned to all methodological, theoretical and clinical components of the systematic case study. Specifically, there are no clear evaluation criteria for the description of research teams (i.e. different data analysts and/or clinicians); the suitability of the systematic case study method; the description of patient’s clinical assessment; the use of other methods or data sources; the general data about therapeutic progress.

Finally, there is something to be said about the recommended reviewer responses (Table ​ (Table10). 10 ). Systematic case studies can vary significantly in their formulation and purpose. The methodological, theoretical and clinical components outlined in Table ​ Table9 9 follow guidelines made by case study journals; however, these are recommendations, not ‘set in stone’ case templates. For this reason, the straightforward checklist approaches adopted by JBI and CASP may be difficult to use for case study researchers and those reviewing case study research. The ETQS open-ended questionnaire approach suggested by Long and Godfrey ( 2004 ) enables a comprehensive, detailed and purpose-oriented assessment, suitable for the evaluation of systematic case studies. That said, there remains a challenge of ensuring that there is less space for the interpretation of evaluative criteria (Williams et al., 2019 ). The combination of checklist and framework approaches would, therefore, provide a more stable appraisal process across different reviewers.

Developing purpose-oriented evaluation criteria for systematic case studies

The starting point in developing evaluation criteria for Case Study Evaluation-tool (CaSE) is addressing the significance of pluralism in systematic case studies. Unlike RCTs, systematic case studies are pluralistic in the sense that they employ divergent practices in methodological procedures ( research process ), and they may include significantly different research aims and purpose ( the end - goal ) (Kaluzeviciute & Willemsen, 2020 ). While some systematic case studies will have an explicit intention to conceptualise and situate a single patient’s experiences and symptoms within a broader clinical population, others will focus on the exploration of phenomena as they emerge from the data. It is therefore important that CaSE is positioned within a purpose - oriented evaluative framework , suitable for the assessment of what each systematic case is good for (rather than determining an absolute measure of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ systematic case studies). This approach to evidence and appraisal is in line with the PBE paradigm. PBE emphasises the study of clinical complexities and variations through local and contingent settings (e.g. single case studies) and promotes methodological pluralism (Barkham & Mellor-Clark, 2003 ).

CaSE checklist for essential components in systematic case studies

In order to conceptualise purpose-oriented appraisal questions, we must first look at what unites and differentiates systematic case studies in psychotherapy. The commonly used theoretical, clinical and methodological systematic case study components were identified earlier in Table ​ Table9. 9 . These components will be seen as essential and common to most systematic case studies in CaSE evaluative criteria. If these essential components are missing in a systematic case study, then it may be implied there is a lack of information, which in turn diminishes the evidential quality of the case. As such, the checklist serves as a tool for checking whether a case study is, indeed, systematic (as opposed to experimental or clinical; see Iwakabe & Gazzola, 2009 for further differentiation between methodologically distinct case study types) and should be used before CaSE Purpose - based Evaluative Framework for Systematic Case Studie s (which is designed for the appraisal of different purposes common to systematic case studies).

As noted earlier in the paper, checklist approaches to appraisal are useful when evaluating the presence or absence of specific information in a research study. This approach can be used to appraise essential components in systematic case studies, as shown below. From a pragmatic point view (Levitt et al., 2017 ; Truijens et al., 2019 ), CaSE Checklist for Essential Components in Systematic Case Studies can be seen as a way to ensure the internal validity of systematic case study: the reviewer is assessing whether sufficient information is provided about the case design, procedure, approaches to inquiry, etc., and whether they are relevant to the researcher’s objectives and conclusions (Table ​ (Table11 11 ).

Case Study Evaluation-tool (CaSE) checklist for essential components in systematic case studies. Recommended responses: Yes, No, unclear or not applicable

CaSE purpose-based evaluative framework for systematic case studies

Identifying differences between systematic case studies means identifying the different purposes systematic case studies have in psychotherapy. Based on the earlier work by social scientist Yin ( 1984 , 1993 ), we can differentiate between exploratory (hypothesis generating, indicating a beginning phase of research), descriptive (particularising case data as it emerges) and representative (a case that is typical of a broader clinical population, referred to as the ‘explanatory case’ by Yin) cases.

Another increasingly significant strand of systematic case studies is transferable (aggregating and transferring case study findings) cases. These cases are based on the process of meta-synthesis (Iwakabe & Gazzola, 2009 ): by examining processes and outcomes in many different case studies dealing with similar clinical issues, researchers can identify common themes and inferences. In this way, single case studies that have relatively little impact on clinical practice, research or health care policy (in the sense that they capture psychotherapy processes rather than produce generalisable claims as in Yin’s representative case studies) can contribute to the generation of a wider knowledge base in psychotherapy (Iwakabe, 2003 , 2005 ). However, there is an ongoing issue of assessing the evidential quality of such transferable cases. According to Duncan and Sparks ( 2020 ), although meta-synthesis and meta-analysis are considered to be ‘gold standard’ for assessing interventions across disparate studies in psychotherapy, they often contain case studies with significant research limitations, inappropriate interpretations and insufficient information. It is therefore important to have a research appraisal process in place for selecting transferable case studies.

Two other types of systematic case study research include: critical (testing and/or confirming existing theories) cases, which are described as an excellent method for falsifying existing theoretical concepts and testing whether therapeutic interventions work in practice with concrete patients (Kaluzeviciute, 2021 ), and unique (going beyond the ‘typical’ cases and demonstrating deviations) cases (Merriam, 1998 ). These two systematic case study types are often seen as less valuable for psychotherapy research given that unique/falsificatory findings are difficult to generalise. But it is clear that practitioners and researchers in our field seek out context-specific data, as well as detailed information on the effectiveness of therapeutic techniques in single cases (Stiles, 2007 ) (Table ​ (Table12 12 ).

Key concept: purpose–based systematic case studies

Each purpose-based case study contributes to PBE in different ways. Representative cases provide qualitatively rich, in-depth data about a clinical phenomenon within its particular context. This offers other clinicians and researchers access to a ‘closed world’ (Mackrill & Iwakabe, 2013 ) containing a wide range of attributes about a conceptual type (e.g. clinical condition or therapeutic technique). Descriptive cases generally seek to demonstrate a realistic snapshot of therapeutic processes, including complex dynamics in therapeutic relationships, and instances of therapeutic failure (Maggio, Molgora, & Oasi, 2019 ). Data in descriptive cases should be presented in a transparent manner (e.g. if there are issues in standardising patient responses to a self-report questionnaire, this should be made explicit). Descriptive cases are commonly used in psychotherapy training and supervision. Unique cases are relevant for both clinicians and researchers: they often contain novel treatment approaches and/or introduce new diagnostic considerations about patients who deviate from the clinical population. Critical cases demonstrate the application of psychological theories ‘in action’ with particular patients; as such, they are relevant to clinicians, researchers and policymakers (Mackrill & Iwakabe, 2013 ). Exploratory cases bring new insight and observations into clinical practice and research. This is particularly useful when comparing (or introducing) different clinical approaches and techniques (Trad & Raine, 1994 ). Findings from exploratory cases often include future research suggestions. Finally, transferable cases provide one solution to the generalisation issue in psychotherapy research through the previously mentioned process of meta-synthesis. Grouped together, transferable cases can contribute to theory building and development, as well as higher levels of abstraction about a chosen area of psychotherapy research (Iwakabe & Gazzola, 2009 ).

With this plurality in mind, it is evident that CaSE has a challenging task of appraising research components that are distinct across six different types of purpose-based systematic case studies. The purpose-specific evaluative criteria in Table ​ Table13 13 was developed in close consultation with epistemological literature associated with each type of case study, including: Yin’s ( 1984 , 1993 ) work on establishing the typicality of representative cases; Duncan and Sparks’ ( 2020 ) and Iwakabe and Gazzola’s ( 2009 ) case selection criteria for meta-synthesis and meta-analysis; Stake’s ( 1995 , 2010 ) research on particularising case narratives; Merriam’s ( 1998 ) guidelines on distinctive attributes of unique case studies; Kennedy’s ( 1979 ) epistemological rules for generalising from case studies; Mahrer’s ( 1988 ) discovery oriented case study approach; and Edelson’s ( 1986 ) guidelines for rigorous hypothesis generation in case studies.

Case Study Evaluation-tool (CaSE) purpose-based evaluative framework for systematic case studies. Recommended responses: open-ended questionnaire

Research on epistemic issues in case writing (Kaluzeviciute, 2021 ) and different forms of scientific thinking in psychoanalytic case studies (Kaluzeviciute & Willemsen, 2020 ) was also utilised to identify case study components that would help improve therapist clinical decision-making and reflexivity.

For the analysis of more complex research components (e.g. the degree of therapist reflexivity), the purpose-based evaluation will utilise a framework approach, in line with comprehensive and open-ended reviewer responses in ETQS (Evaluation Tool for Qualitative Studies) (Long & Godfrey, 2004 ) (Table ​ (Table13). 13 ). That is to say, the evaluation here is not so much about the presence or absence of information (as in the checklist approach) but the degree to which the information helps the case with its unique purpose, whether it is generalisability or typicality. Therefore, although the purpose-oriented evaluation criteria below encompasses comprehensive questions at a considerable level of generality (in the sense that not all components may be required or relevant for each case study), it nevertheless seeks to engage with each type of purpose-based systematic case study on an individual basis (attending to research or clinical components that are unique to each of type of case study).

It is important to note that, as this is an introductory paper to CaSE, the evaluative framework is still preliminary: it involves some of the core questions that pertain to the nature of all six purpose-based systematic case studies. However, there is a need to develop a more comprehensive and detailed CaSE appraisal framework for each purpose-based systematic case study in the future.

Using CaSE on published systematic case studies in psychotherapy: an example

To illustrate the use of CaSE Purpose - based Evaluative Framework for Systematic Case Studies , a case study by Lunn, Daniel, and Poulsen ( 2016 ) titled ‘ Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy With a Client With Bulimia Nervosa ’ was selected from the Single Case Archive (SCA) and analysed in Table ​ Table14. 14 . Based on the core questions associated with the six purpose-based systematic case study types in Table ​ Table13(1 13 (1 to 6), the purpose of Lunn et al.’s ( 2016 ) case was identified as critical (testing an existing theoretical suggestion).

Using Case Study Evaluation-tool (CaSE): Lunn et al. ( 2016 )’s case ‘ Psychoanalytic psychotherapy with a client with bulimia nervosa ’

Sometimes, case study authors will explicitly define the purpose of their case in the form of research objectives (as was the case in Lunn et al.’s study); this helps identifying which purpose-based questions are most relevant for the evaluation of the case. However, some case studies will require comprehensive analysis in order to identify their purpose (or multiple purposes). As such, it is recommended that CaSE reviewers first assess the degree and manner in which information about the studied phenomenon, patient data, clinical discourse and research are presented before deciding on the case purpose.

Although each purpose-based systematic case study will contribute to different strands of psychotherapy (theory, practice, training, etc.) and focus on different forms of data (e.g. theory testing vs extensive clinical descriptions), the overarching aim across all systematic case studies in psychotherapy is to study local and contingent processes, such as variations in patient symptoms and complexities of the clinical setting. The comprehensive framework approach will therefore allow reviewers to assess the degree of external validity in systematic case studies (Barkham & Mellor-Clark, 2003 ). Furthermore, assessing the case against its purpose will let reviewers determine whether the case achieves its set goals (research objectives and aims). The example below shows that Lunn et al.’s ( 2016 ) case is successful in functioning as a critical case as the authors provide relevant, high-quality information about their tested therapeutic conditions.

Finally, it is also possible to use CaSE to gather specific type of systematic case studies for one’s research, practice, training, etc. For example, a CaSE reviewer might want to identify as many descriptive case studies focusing on negative therapeutic relationships as possible for their clinical supervision. The reviewer will therefore only need to refer to CaSE questions in Table ​ Table13(2) 13 (2) on descriptive cases. If the reviewed cases do not align with the questions in Table ​ Table13(2), 13 (2), then they are not suitable for the CaSE reviewer who is looking for “know-how” knowledge and detailed clinical narratives.

Concluding comments

This paper introduces a novel Case Study Evaluation-tool (CaSE) for systematic case studies in psychotherapy. Unlike most appraisal tools in EBP, CaSE is positioned within purpose-oriented evaluation criteria, in line with the PBE paradigm. CaSE enables reviewers to assess what each systematic case is good for (rather than determining an absolute measure of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ systematic case studies). In order to explicate a purpose-based evaluative framework, six different systematic case study purposes in psychotherapy have been identified: representative cases (purpose: typicality), descriptive cases (purpose: particularity), unique cases (purpose: deviation), critical cases (purpose: falsification/confirmation), exploratory cases (purpose: hypothesis generation) and transferable cases (purpose: generalisability). Each case was linked with an existing epistemological network, such as Iwakabe and Gazzola’s ( 2009 ) work on case selection criteria for meta-synthesis. The framework approach includes core questions specific to each purpose-based case study (Table 13 (1–6)). The aim is to assess the external validity and effectiveness of each case study against its set out research objectives and aims. Reviewers are required to perform a comprehensive and open-ended data analysis, as shown in the example in Table ​ Table14 14 .

Along with CaSE Purpose - based Evaluative Framework (Table ​ (Table13), 13 ), the paper also developed CaSE Checklist for Essential Components in Systematic Case Studies (Table ​ (Table12). 12 ). The checklist approach is meant to aid reviewers in assessing the presence or absence of essential case study components, such as the rationale behind choosing the case study method and description of patient’s history. If essential components are missing in a systematic case study, then it may be implied that there is a lack of information, which in turn diminishes the evidential quality of the case. Following broader definitions of validity set out by Levitt et al. ( 2017 ) and Truijens et al. ( 2019 ), it could be argued that the checklist approach allows for the assessment of (non-quantitative) internal validity in systematic case studies: does the researcher provide sufficient information about the case study design, rationale, research objectives, epistemological/philosophical paradigms, assessment procedures, data analysis, etc., to account for their research conclusions?

It is important to note that this paper is set as an introduction to CaSE; by extension, it is also set as an introduction to research evaluation and appraisal processes for case study researchers in psychotherapy. As such, it was important to provide a step-by-step epistemological rationale and process behind the development of CaSE evaluative framework and checklist. However, this also means that further research needs to be conducted in order to develop the tool. While CaSE Purpose - based Evaluative Framework involves some of the core questions that pertain to the nature of all six purpose-based systematic case studies, there is a need to develop individual and comprehensive CaSE evaluative frameworks for each of the purpose-based systematic case studies in the future. This line of research is likely to enhance CaSE target audience: clinicians interested in reviewing highly particular clinical narratives will attend to descriptive case study appraisal frameworks; researchers working with qualitative meta-synthesis will find transferable case study appraisal frameworks most relevant to their work; while teachers on psychotherapy and counselling modules may seek out unique case study appraisal frameworks.

Furthermore, although CaSE Checklist for Essential Components in Systematic Case Studies and CaSE Purpose - based Evaluative Framework for Systematic Case Studies are presented in a comprehensive, detailed manner, with definitions and examples that would enable reviewers to have a good grasp of the appraisal process, it is likely that different reviewers may have different interpretations or ideas of what might be ‘substantial’ case study data. This, in part, is due to the methodologically pluralistic nature of the case study genre itself; what is relevant for one case study may not be relevant for another, and vice-versa. To aid with the review process, future research on CaSE should include a comprehensive paper on using the tool. This paper should involve evaluation examples with all six purpose-based systematic case studies, as well as a ‘search’ exercise (using CaSE to assess the relevance of case studies for one’s research, practice, training, etc.).

Finally, further research needs to be developed on how (and, indeed, whether) systematic case studies should be reviewed with specific ‘grades’ or ‘assessments’ that go beyond the qualitative examination in Table ​ Table14. 14 . This would be particularly significant for the processes of qualitative meta-synthesis and meta-analysis. These research developments will further enhance CaSE tool, and, in turn, enable psychotherapy researchers to appraise their findings within clear, purpose-based evaluative criteria appropriate for systematic case studies.

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank Prof Jochem Willemsen (Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Université catholique de Louvain-la-Neuve), Prof Wayne Martin (School of Philosophy and Art History, University of Essex), Dr Femke Truijens (Institute of Psychology, Erasmus University Rotterdam) and the reviewers of Psicologia: Reflexão e Crítica / Psychology : Research and Review for their feedback, insight and contributions to the manuscript.

Author’s contributions

GK is the sole author of the manuscript. The author(s) read and approved the final manuscript.

Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC) and Consortium for Humanities and the Arts South-East England (CHASE) Doctoral Training Partnership, Award Number [AH/L50 3861/1].

Availability of data and materials

Declarations.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

• Almond R. “I Can Do It (All) Myself”: Clinical technique with defensive narcissistic self–sufficiency. Psychoanalytic Psychology. 2004; 21 (3):371–384. doi: 10.1037/0736-9735.21.3.371. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• American Psychological Association . Evidence–based case study. 2010. [ Google Scholar ]
• Aveline M. Clinical case studies: Their place in evidence–based practice. Psychodynamic Practice: Individuals, Groups and Organisations. 2005; 11 (2):133–152. doi: 10.1080/14753630500108174. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Barkham M, Mellor-Clark J. Bridging evidence-based practice and practice-based evidence: Developing a rigorous and relevant knowledge for the psychological therapies. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy. 2003; 10 (6):319–327. doi: 10.1002/cpp.379. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Berg H. How does evidence–based practice in psychology work? – As an ethical demarcation. Philosophical Psychology. 2019; 32 (6):853–873. doi: 10.1080/09515089.2019.1632424. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Berg H, Slaattelid R. Facts and values in psychotherapy—A critique of the empirical reduction of psychotherapy within evidence-based practice. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice. 2017; 23 (5):1075–1080. doi: 10.1111/jep.12739. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bower P. Efficacy in evidence-based practice. Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy. 2003; 10 (6):328–336. doi: 10.1002/cpp.380. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cartwright, N., & Hardie, J. (2012). What are RCTs good for? In N. Cartwright, & J. Hardie (Eds.), Evidence–based policy: A practical guide to doing it better . Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780199841608.003.0008.
• Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) Qualitative checklist. 2018. [ Google Scholar ]
• Davison, G. C., & Lazarus, A. A. (2007). Clinical case studies are important in the science and practice of psychotherapy. In S. O. Lilienfeld, & W. T. O’Donohue (Eds.), The great ideas of clinical science: 17 principles that every mental health professional should understand , (pp. 149–162). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
• Douglas H. The irreducible complexity of objectivity. Synthese. 2004; 138 (3):453–473. doi: 10.1023/B:SYNT.0000016451.18182.91. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Duncan BL, Sparks JA. When meta–analysis misleads: A critical case study of a meta–analysis of client feedback. Psychological Services. 2020; 17 (4):487–496. doi: 10.1037/ser0000398. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Edelson, M. (1986). Causal explanation in science and in psychoanalysis—Implications for writing a case study. Psychoanalytic Study of Child , 41 (1), 89–127. 10.1080/00797308.1986.11823452. [ PubMed ]
• Edwards DJA. Collaborative versus adversarial stances in scientific discourse: Implications for the role of systematic case studies in the development of evidence–based practice in psychotherapy. Pragmatic Case Studies in Psychotherapy. 2013; 3 (1):6–34. [ Google Scholar ]
• Edwards DJA, Dattilio FM, Bromley DB. Developing evidence–based practice: The role of case–based research. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice. 2004; 35 (6):589–597. doi: 10.1037/0735-7028.35.6.589. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Erickson F. Comments on causality in qualitative inquiry. Qualitative Inquiry. 2012; 18 (8):686–688. doi: 10.1177/1077800412454834. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fishman, D. B. (1999). The case for pragmatic psychology . New York University Press.
• Fishman DB. Editor’s introduction to PCSP––From single case to database: A new method for enhancing psychotherapy practice. Pragmatic Case Studies in Psychotherapy. 2005; 1 (1):1–50. [ Google Scholar ]
• Fishman, D. B., Messer, S. B., Edwards, D. J. A., & Dattilio, F. M. (Eds.) (2017). Case studies within psychotherapy trials: Integrating qualitative and quantitative methods . Oxford University Press.
• Fox, N. J. (2003). Practice–based evidence: Towards collaborative and transgressive research. Sociology , 37 (1), 81–102. 10.1177/0038038503037001388.
• Gabbay, J., & le May, A. (2011). Practice–based evidence for healthcare: Clinical mindlines . Routledge.
• Green, L. W., & Latchford, G. (2012). Maximising the benefits of psychotherapy: A practice–based evidence approach . Wiley–Blackwell. 10.1002/9781119967590.
• Hannes K, Lockwood C, Pearson A. A comparative analysis of three online appraisal instruments’ ability to assess validity in qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research. 2010; 20 (12):1736–1743. doi: 10.1177/1049732310378656. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hartling L, Chisholm A, Thomson D, Dryden DM. A descriptive analysis of overviews of reviews published between 2000 and 2011. PLoS One. 2012; 7 (11):e49667. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0049667. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hill A, Spittlehouse C. What is critical appraisal? Evidence–Based Medicine. 2003; 3 (2):1–8. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hilliard RB. Single–case methodology in psychotherapy process and outcome research. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 1993; 61 (3):373–380. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.61.3.373. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Horn SD, Gassaway J. Practice–based evidence study design for comparative effectiveness research. Medical Care. 2007; 45 (10):S50–S57. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e318070c07b. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Iwakabe S. Paper presented at the 19th Annual Conference of the Society for Exploration of Psychotherapy Integration, New York. 2003. Common change events in stages of psychotherapy: A qualitative analysis of case reports. [ Google Scholar ]
• Iwakabe S. Pragmatic meta–analysis of case studies. Annual Progress of Family Psychology. 2005; 23 :154–169. [ Google Scholar ]
• Iwakabe S, Gazzola N. From single–case studies to practice–based knowledge: Aggregating and synthesizing case studies. Psychotherapy Research. 2009; 19 (4-5):601–611. doi: 10.1080/10503300802688494. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jimenez-Buedo M, Miller L. Why a Trade–Off? The relationship between the external and internal validity of experiments. THEORIA: An International Journal for Theory History and Foundations of Science. 2010; 25 (3):301–321. [ Google Scholar ]
• Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical appraisal checklist for qualitative research. 2017. [ Google Scholar ]
• Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Checklist for case reports. 2017. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kaluzeviciute, G. (2021). Validity, Evidence and Appraisal in Systematic Psychotherapy Case Studies . Paper presented at the Research Forum of Department of Psychosocial and Psychoanalytic Studies, University of Essex, Colchester, UK. 10.13140/RG.2.2.33502.15683 
• Kaluzeviciute G, Willemsen J. Scientific thinking styles: The different ways of thinking in psychoanalytic case studies. The International Journal of Psychoanalysis. 2020; 101 (5):900–922. doi: 10.1080/00207578.2020.1796491. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Katrak P, Bialocerkowski AE, Massy-Westropp N, Kumar SVS, Grimmer K. A systematic review of the content of critical appraisal tools. BMC Medical Research Methodology. 2004; 4 (1):22. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-4-22. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kennedy MM. Generalising from single case studies. Evaluation Quarterly. 1979; 3 (4):661–678. doi: 10.1177/0193841X7900300409. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Laska KM, Gurman AS, Wampold BE. Expanding the lens of evidence–based practice in psychotherapy: A common factors perspective. Psychotherapy. 2014; 51 (4):467–481. doi: 10.1037/a0034332. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Levitt HM, Motulsky SL, Wertz FJ, Morrow SL, Ponterotto JG. Recommendations for designing and reviewing qualitative research in psychology: Promoting methodological integrity. Qualitative Psychology. 2017; 4 (1):2–22. doi: 10.1037/qup0000082. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lilienfeld SO, Ritschel LA, Lynn SJ, Cautin RL, Latzman RD. Why many clinical psychologists are resistant to evidence–based practice: root causes and constructive remedies. Clinical Psychology Review. 2013; 33 (7):883–900. doi: 10.1016/j.cpr.2012.09.008. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Long AF, Godfrey M. An evaluation tool to assess the quality of qualitative research studies. International Journal of Social Research Methodology. 2004; 7 (2):181–196. doi: 10.1080/1364557032000045302. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Longhofer J, Floersch J, Hartmann EA. Case for the case study: How and why they matter. Clinical Social Work Journal. 2017; 45 (3):189–200. doi: 10.1007/s10615-017-0631-8. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lunn S, Daniel SIF, Poulsen S. Psychoanalytic psychotherapy with a client with bulimia nervosa. Psychotherapy. 2016; 53 (2):206–215. doi: 10.1037/pst0000052. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mackrill T, Iwakabe S. Making a case for case studies in psychotherapy training: A small step towards establishing an empirical basis for psychotherapy training. Counselling Psychotherapy Quarterly. 2013; 26 (3–4):250–266. doi: 10.1080/09515070.2013.832148. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Maggio S, Molgora S, Oasi O. Analyzing psychotherapeutic failures: A research on the variables involved in the treatment with an individual setting of 29 cases. Frontiers in Psychology. 2019; 10 :1250. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01250. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mahrer AR. Discovery–oriented psychotherapy research: Rationale, aims, and methods. American Psychologist. 1988; 43 (9):694–702. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.43.9.694. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Margison FB, et al. Measurement and psychotherapy: Evidence–based practice and practice–based evidence. British Journal of Psychiatry. 2000; 177 (2):123–130. doi: 10.1192/bjp.177.2.123. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Maxwell JA. Causal explanation, qualitative research, and scientific inquiry in education. Educational Researcher. 2004; 33 (2):3–11. doi: 10.3102/0013189X033002003. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McLeod J. Case studies and practitioner research: Building knowledge through systematic inquiry into individual cases. Counselling and Psychotherapy Research: Linking research with practice. 2002; 2 (4):264–268. doi: 10.1080/14733140212331384755. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McLeod, J. (2010). Case study research in counselling and psychotherapy . SAGE Publications. 10.4135/9781446287897.
• McLeod J, Elliott R. Systematic case study research: A practice–oriented introduction to building an evidence base for counselling and psychotherapy. Counselling and Psychotherapy Research. 2011; 11 (1):1–10. doi: 10.1080/14733145.2011.548954. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Meganck R, Inslegers R, Krivzov J, Notaerts L. Beyond clinical case studies in psychoanalysis: A review of psychoanalytic empirical single case studies published in ISI–ranked journals. Frontiers in Psychology. 2017; 8 :1749. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01749. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education . Jossey–Bass Publishers.
• Michels R. The case history. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association. 2000; 48 (2):355–375. doi: 10.1177/00030651000480021201. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Midgley N. Re–reading “Little Hans”: Freud’s case study and the question of competing paradigms in psychoanalysis. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association. 2006; 54 (2):537–559. doi: 10.1177/00030651060540021601. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rosqvist, J., Thomas, J. C., & Truax, P. (2011). Effectiveness versus efficacy studies. In J. C. Thomas, & M. Hersen (Eds.), Understanding research in clinical and counseling psychology , (pp. 319–354). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
• Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JAM, Haynes RB, Richardson WS. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. BMJ. 1996; 312 (7023):71–72. doi: 10.1136/bmj.312.7023.71. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research . SAGE Publications.
• Stake, R. E. (2010). Qualitative research: Studying how things work . The Guilford Press.
• Stewart RE, Chambless DL. Does psychotherapy research inform treatment decisions in private practice? Journal of Clinical Psychology. 2007; 63 (3):267–281. doi: 10.1002/jclp.20347. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Stiles WB. Theory–building case studies of counselling and psychotherapy. Counselling and Psychotherapy Research. 2007; 7 (2):122–127. doi: 10.1080/14733140701356742. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Teachman BA, Drabick DA, Hershenberg R, Vivian D, Wolfe BE, Goldfried MR. Bridging the gap between clinical research and clinical practice: introduction to the special section. Psychotherapy. 2012; 49 (2):97–100. doi: 10.1037/a0027346. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Thorne S, Jensen L, Kearney MH, Noblit G, Sandelowski M. Qualitative metasynthesis: Reflections on methodological orientation and ideological agenda. Qualitative Health Research. 2004; 14 (10):1342–1365. doi: 10.1177/1049732304269888. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Timulak L. Meta–analysis of qualitative studies: A tool for reviewing qualitative research findings in psychotherapy. Psychotherapy Research. 2009; 19 (4–5):591–600. doi: 10.1080/10503300802477989. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Trad PV, Raine MJ. A prospective interpretation of unconscious processes during psychoanalytic psychotherapy. Psychoanalytic Psychology. 1994; 11 (1):77–100. doi: 10.1037/h0079522. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Truijens, F., Cornelis, S., Desmet, M., & De Smet, M. (2019). Validity beyond measurement: Why psychometric validity is insufficient for valid psychotherapy research. Frontiers in Psychology , 10 . 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00532. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ]
• Tuckett, D. (Ed.) (2008). The new library of psychoanalysis. Psychoanalysis comparable and incomparable: The evolution of a method to describe and compare psychoanalytic approaches . Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group. 10.4324/9780203932551.
• van Hennik R. Practice based evidence based practice, part II: Navigating complexity and validity from within. Journal of Family Therapy. 2020; 43 (1):27–45. doi: 10.1111/1467-6427.12291. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Westen D, Novotny CM, Thompson-Brenner H. The empirical status of empirically supported psychotherapies: Assumptions, findings, and reporting in controlled clinical trials. Psychological Bulletin. 2004; 130 (4):631–663. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.130.4.631. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Widdowson, M. (2011). Case study research methodology. International Journal of Transactional Analysis Research & Practice , 2 (1). 10.29044/v2i1p25.
• Willemsen, J., Della Rosa, E., & Kegerreis, S. (2017). Clinical case studies in psychoanalytic and psychodynamic treatment. Frontiers in Psychology , 8 (108). 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00108. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ]
• Williams, V., Boylan, A., & Nunan, D. (2019). Critical appraisal of qualitative research: Necessity, partialities and the issue of bias. BMJ Evidence–Based Medicine . 10.1136/bmjebm-2018-111132. [ PubMed ]
• Yin, R. K. (1984). Case study research: Design and methods . SAGE Publications.
• Yin, R. K. (1993). Applications of case study research . SAGE Publications.

How to Write a Case Conceptualization: 10 Examples (+ PDF)

Such understanding can be developed by reading relevant records, meeting with clients face to face, and using assessments such as a mental status examination.

As you proceed, you are forming a guiding concept of who this client is, how they became who they are, and where their personal journey might be heading.

Such a guiding concept, which will shape any needed interventions, is called a case conceptualization, and we will examine various examples in this article.

Before you continue, we thought you might like to download our three Positive CBT Exercises for free . These science-based exercises will provide you with detailed insight into positive Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy (CBT) and give you the tools to apply it in your therapy or coaching.

This Article Contains:

What is a case conceptualization or formulation, 4 things to include in your case formulation, a helpful example & model, 3 samples of case formulations, 6 templates and worksheets for counselors, relevant resources from positivepsychology.com, a take-home message.

In psychology and related fields, a case conceptualization summarizes the key facts and findings from an evaluation to provide guidance for recommendations.

This is typically the evaluation of an individual, although you can extend the concept of case conceptualization to summarizing findings about a group or organization.

Based on the case conceptualization, recommendations can be made to improve a client’s self-care , mental status, job performance, etc (Sperry & Sperry, 2020).

• Summary of the client’s identifying information, referral questions, and timeline of important events or factors in their life . A timeline can be especially helpful in understanding how the client’s strengths and limitations have evolved.
• Statement of the client’s core strengths . Identifying core strengths in the client’s life should help guide any recommendations, including how strengths might be used to offset limitations.
• Statement concerning a client’s limitations or weaknesses . This will also help guide any recommendations. If a weakness is worth mentioning in a case conceptualization, it is worth writing a recommendation about it.

Note: As with mental status examinations , observations in this context concerning weaknesses are not value judgments, about whether the client is a good person, etc. The observations are clinical judgments meant to guide recommendations.

• A summary of how the strengths, limitations, and other key information about a client inform diagnosis and prognosis .

You should briefly clarify how you arrived at a given diagnosis. For example, why do you believe a personality disorder is primary, rather than a major depressive disorder?

Many clinicians provide diagnoses in formal psychiatric terms, per the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) or Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5). Some clinicians will state a diagnosis in less formal terms that do not coincide exactly with ICD-10 or DSM-5 codes. What is arguably more important is that a diagnostic impression, formal or not, gives a clear sense of who the person is and the support they need to reach their goals.

Prognosis is a forecast about whether the client’s condition can be expected to improve, worsen, or remain stable. Prognosis can be difficult, as it often depends on unforeseeable factors. However, this should not keep you from offering a conservative opinion on a client’s expected course, provided treatment recommendations are followed.

Download 3 Free Positive CBT Exercises (PDF)

These detailed, science-based exercises will equip you or your clients with tools to find new pathways to reduce suffering and more effectively cope with life stressors.

Download 3 Free Positive CBT Tools Pack (PDF)

By filling out your name and email address below.

Based on the pointers for writing a case conceptualization above, an example for summarizing an adolescent case (in this instance, a counseling case for relieving depression and improving social skills) might read as follows.

Background and referral information

This is a 15-year-old Haitian–American youth, referred by his mother for concerns about self-isolation, depression, and poor social skills. He reportedly moved with his mother to the United States three years ago.

He reportedly misses his life and friends in Haiti. The mother states he has had difficulty adjusting socially in the United States, especially with peers. He has become increasingly self-isolating, appears sad and irritable, and has started to refuse to go to school.

His mother is very supportive and aware of his emotional–behavioral needs. The youth has been enrolled in a social skills group at school and has attended three sessions, with some reported benefit. He is agreeable to start individual counseling. He reportedly does well in school academically when he applies himself.

Limitations

Behavioral form completed by his mother shows elevated depression scale (T score = 80). There is a milder elevation on the inattention scale (T score = 60), which suggests depression is more acute than inattention and might drive it.

He is also elevated on a scale measuring social skills and involvement (T score = 65). Here too, it is reasonable to assume that depression is driving social isolation and difficulty relating to peers, especially since while living in Haiti, he was reportedly quite social with peers.

Diagnostic impressions, treatment guidance, prognosis

This youth’s history, presentation on interview, and results of emotional–behavioral forms suggest some difficulty with depression, likely contributing to social isolation. As he has no prior reported history of depression, this is most likely a reaction to missing his former home and difficulty adjusting to his new school and peers.

Treatments should include individual counseling with an evidence-based approach such as Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy (CBT). His counselor should consider emotional processing and social skills building as well.

Prognosis is favorable, with anticipated benefit apparent within 12 sessions of CBT.

How to write a case conceptualization: An outline

The following outline is necessarily general. It can be modified as needed, with points excluded or added, depending on the case.

• Client’s gender, age, level of education, vocational status, marital status
• Referred by whom, why, and for what type of service (e.g., testing, counseling, coaching)
• In the spirit of strengths-based assessment, consider listing the client’s strengths first, before any limitations.
• Consider the full range of positive factors supporting the client.
• Physical health
• Family support
• Financial resources
• Capacity to work
• Resilience or other positive personality traits
• Emotional stability
• Cognitive strengths, per history and testing
• The client’s limitations or relative weaknesses should be described in a way that highlights those most needing attention or treatment.
• Medical conditions affecting daily functioning
• Lack of family or other social support
• Limited financial resources
• Inability to find or hold suitable employment
• Substance abuse or dependence
• Proneness to interpersonal conflict
• Emotional–behavioral problems, including anxious or depressive symptoms
• Cognitive deficits, per history and testing
• Diagnoses that are warranted can be given in either DSM-5 or ICD-10 terms.
• There can be more than one diagnosis given. If that’s the case, consider describing these in terms of primary diagnosis, secondary diagnosis, etc.
• The primary diagnosis should best encompass the client’s key symptoms or traits, best explain their behavior, or most need treatment.
• Take care to avoid over-assigning multiple and potentially overlapping diagnoses.

When writing a case conceptualization, always keep in mind the timeline of significant events or factors in the examinee’s life.

• Decide which events or factors are significant enough to include in a case conceptualization.
• When these points are placed in a timeline, they help you understand how the person has evolved to become who they are now.
• A good timeline can also help you understand which factors in a person’s life might be causative for others. For example, if a person has suffered a frontal head injury in the past year, this might help explain their changeable moods, presence of depressive disorder, etc.

Sample #1: Conceptualization for CBT case

This is a 35-year-old Caucasian man referred by his physician for treatment of generalized anxiety.

Strengths/supports in his case include willingness to engage in treatment, high average intelligence per recent cognitive testing, supportive family, and regular physical exercise (running).

Limiting factors include relatively low stress coping skills, frequent migraines (likely stress related), and relative social isolation (partly due to some anxiety about social skills).

The client’s presentation on interview and review of medical/psychiatric records show a history of chronic worry, including frequent worries about his wife’s health and his finances. He meets criteria for DSM-5 generalized anxiety disorder. He has also described occasional panic-type episodes, which do not currently meet full criteria for panic disorder but could develop into such without preventive therapy.

Treatments should include CBT for generalized anxiety, including keeping a worry journal; regular assessment of anxiety levels with Penn State Worry Questionnaire and/or Beck Anxiety Inventory; cognitive restructuring around negative beliefs that reinforce anxiety; and practice of relaxation techniques, such as progressive muscle relaxation and diaphragmatic breathing .

Prognosis is good, given the evidence for efficacy of CBT for anxiety disorders generally (Hofmann, Asnaani, Vonk, Sawyer, & Fang, 2012).

Sample #2: Conceptualization for DBT case

This 51-year-old Haitian–American woman is self-referred for depressive symptoms, including reported moods of “rage,” “sadness,” and “emptiness.” She says that many of her difficulties involve family, friends, and coworkers who regularly “disrespect” her and “plot against her behind her back.”

Her current psychiatrist has diagnosed her with personality disorder with borderline features, but she doubts the accuracy of this diagnosis.

Strengths/supports include a willingness to engage in treatment, highly developed and marketable computer programming skills, and engagement in leisure activities such as playing backgammon with friends.

Limiting factors include low stress coping skills, mild difficulties with attention and recent memory (likely due in part to depressive affect), and a tendency to self-medicate with alcohol when feeling depressed.

The client’s presentation on interview, review of medical/psychiatric records, and results of MMPI-2 personality inventory corroborate her psychiatrist’s diagnosis of borderline personality disorder.

The diagnosis is supported by a longstanding history of unstable identity, volatile personal relationships with fear of being abandoned, feelings of emptiness, reactive depressive disorder with suicidal gestures, and lack of insight into interpersonal difficulties that have resulted in her often stressed and depressive state.

Treatments should emphasize a DBT group that her psychiatrist has encouraged her to attend but to which she has not yet gone. There should also be regular individual counseling emphasizing DBT skills including mindfulness or present moment focus, building interpersonal skills, emotional regulation, and distress tolerance. There should be a counseling element for limiting alcohol use. Cognitive exercises are also recommended.

Of note, DBT is the only evidence-based treatment for borderline personality disorder (May, Richardi, & Barth, 2016). Prognosis is guardedly optimistic, provided she engages in both group and individual DBT treatments on a weekly basis, and these treatments continue without interruption for at least three months, with refresher sessions as needed.

Sample #3: Conceptualization in a family therapy case

This 45-year-old African-American woman was initially referred for individual therapy for “rapid mood swings” and a tendency to become embroiled in family conflicts. Several sessions of family therapy also appear indicated, and her psychiatrist concurs.

The client’s husband (50 years old) and son (25 years old, living with parents) were interviewed separately and together. When interviewed separately, her husband and son each indicated the client’s alcohol intake was “out of control,” and that she was consuming about six alcoholic beverages throughout the day, sometimes more.

Her husband and son each said the client was often too tired for household duties by the evening and often had rapid shifts in mood from happy to angry to “crying in her room.”

On individual interview, the client stated that her husband and son were each drinking about as much as she, that neither ever offered to help her with household duties, and that her son appeared unable to keep a job, which left him home most of the day, making demands on her for meals, etc.

On interview with the three family members, each acknowledged that the instances above were occurring at home, although father and son tended to blame most of the problems, including son’s difficulty maintaining employment, on the client and her drinking.

Strengths/supports in the family include a willingness of each member to engage in family sessions, awareness of supportive resources such as assistance for son’s job search, and a willingness by all to examine and reduce alcohol use by all family members as needed.

Limiting factors in this case include apparent tendency of all household members to drink to some excess, lack of insight by one or more family members as to how alcohol consumption is contributing to communication and other problems in the household, and a tendency by husband and son to make this client the family scapegoat.

The family dynamic can be conceptualized in this case through a DBT lens.

From this perspective, problems develop within the family when the environment is experienced by one or more members as invalidating and unsupportive. DBT skills with a nonjudgmental focus, active listening to others, reflecting each other’s feelings, and tolerance of distress in the moment should help to develop an environment that supports all family members and facilitates effective communication.

It appears that all family members in this case would benefit from engaging in the above DBT skills, to support and communicate with one another.

Prognosis is guardedly optimistic if family will engage in therapy with DBT elements for at least six sessions (with refresher sessions as needed).

Introduction to case conceptualization – Thomas Field

The following worksheets can be used for case conceptualization and planning.

• Case Conceptualization Worksheet: Individual Counseling helps counselors develop a case conceptualization for individual clients.
• Case Conceptualization Worksheet: Couples Counseling helps counselors develop a case conceptualization for couples.
• Case Conceptualization Worksheet: Family Counseling helps counselors develop a case conceptualization for families.
• Case Conceptualization and Action Plan: Individual Counseling helps clients facilitate conceptualization of their own case, at approximately six weeks into counseling and thereafter at appropriate intervals.
• Case Conceptualization and Action Plan: Couples Counseling helps couples facilitate conceptualization of their own case, at approximately six weeks into counseling and thereafter at appropriate intervals.
• Case Conceptualization and Action Plan: Family Counseling helps families facilitate conceptualization of their own case, at approximately six weeks into counseling and thereafter at appropriate intervals.

17 Science-Based Ways To Apply Positive CBT

These 17 Positive CBT & Cognitive Therapy Exercises [PDF] include our top-rated, ready-made templates for helping others develop more helpful thoughts and behaviors in response to challenges, while broadening the scope of traditional CBT.

Created by Experts. 100% Science-based.

The following resources can be found in the Positive Psychology Toolkit© , and their full versions can be accessed by a subscription.

Analyzing Strengths Use in Different Life Domains can help clients understand their notable strengths and which strengths can be used to more advantage in new contexts.

Family Strength Spotting is another relevant resource. Each family member fills out a worksheet detailing notable strengths of other family members. In reviewing all worksheets, each family member can gain a greater appreciation for other members’ strengths, note common or unique strengths, and determine how best to use these combined strengths to achieve family goals.

Four Front Assessment is another resource designed to help counselors conceptualize a case based on a client’s personal and environmental strengths and weaknesses. The idea behind this tool is that environmental factors in the broad sense, such as a supportive/unsupportive family, are too often overlooked in conceptualizing a case.

If you’re looking for more science-based ways to help others through CBT, check out this collection of 17 validated positive CBT tools for practitioners. Use them to help others overcome unhelpful thoughts and feelings and develop more positive behaviors.

In helping professions, success in working with clients depends first and foremost on how well you understand them.

This understanding is crystallized in a case conceptualization.

Case conceptualization helps answer key questions. Who is this client? How did they become who they are? What supports do they need to reach their goals?

The conceptualization itself depends on gathering all pertinent data on a given case, through record review, interview, behavioral observation, questionnaires completed by the client, etc.

Once the data is assembled, the counselor, coach, or other involved professional can focus on enumerating the client’s strengths, weaknesses, and limitations.

It is also often helpful to put the client’s strengths and limitations in a timeline so you can see how they have evolved and which factors might have contributed to the emergence of others.

Based on this in-depth understanding of the client, you can then tailor specific recommendations for enhancing their strengths, overcoming their weaknesses, and reaching their particular goals.

We hope you have enjoyed this discussion of how to conceptualize cases in the helping professions and that you will find some tools for doing so useful.

We hope you enjoyed reading this article. For more information, don’t forget to download our three Positive CBT Exercises for free .

• Hofmann, S. G., Asnaani, A., Vonk, I. J., Sawyer, A. T., & Fang, A. (2012). The efficacy of cognitive behavioral therapy: A review of meta-analyses. Cognitive Therapy and Research , 36 (5), 427–440.
• May, J. M., Richardi, T. M., & Barth, K. S. (2016). Dialectical behavior therapy as treatment for borderline personality disorder. The Mental Health Clinician , 6 (2), 62–67.
• Sperry, L., & Sperry, J. (2020).  Case conceptualization: Mastering this competency with ease and confidence . Routledge.

Share this article:

Article feedback

What our readers think.

I found this very helpful and MORE understanding. I think I will often visit this page.

Let us know your thoughts Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Related articles

Youth Counseling: 17 Courses & Activities for Helping Teens

From a maturing body and brain to developing life skills and values, the teen years can be challenging, and mental health concerns may arise. Teens [...]

How To Plan Your Counseling Session: 6 Examples

Planning is crucial in a counseling session to ensure that time inside–and outside–therapy sessions is well spent, with the client achieving a successful outcome within [...]

Applied Positive Psychology in Therapy: Your Ultimate Guide

Without a doubt, this is an exciting time for positive psychology in therapy. Many academics and therapists now recognize the value of this fascinating, evolving [...]

Read other articles by their category

• Body & Brain (48)
• Coaching & Application (57)
• Compassion (26)
• Counseling (51)
• Emotional Intelligence (24)
• Gratitude (18)
• Grief & Bereavement (21)
• Happiness & SWB (40)
• Meaning & Values (26)
• Meditation (20)
• Mindfulness (45)
• Motivation & Goals (45)
• Optimism & Mindset (34)
• Positive CBT (28)
• Positive Communication (20)
• Positive Education (47)
• Positive Emotions (32)
• Positive Leadership (17)
• Positive Parenting (3)
• Positive Psychology (33)
• Positive Workplace (37)
• Productivity (16)
• Relationships (46)
• Resilience & Coping (36)
• Self Awareness (21)
• Self Esteem (37)
• Strengths & Virtues (31)
• Stress & Burnout Prevention (34)
• Theory & Books (46)
• Therapy Exercises (37)
• Types of Therapy (64)

Sign up for your FREE e-newsletter

You’ll regularly recieve powerful strategies for personal development, tips to improve the growth of your counselling practice, the latest industry news and much more.

We’ll keep your information private and never sell, rent, trade or share it with any other organisation. And you can cancel anytime.

Counselling Case Study: Relationship Problems

Mark is 28 and has been married to Sarah for six years. He works for his uncle and they regularly stay back after work to chat. Sarah has threatened to leave him if he does not spend more time with her, but when they are together, they spend most of the time arguing, so he avoids her even more. He loves her, but is finding it hard to put up with her moods. The last few weeks, he has been getting really stressed out and is having trouble sleeping. He’s made a few mistakes at work and his uncle has warned him to pick up his act.

This study deals with the first two of five sessions. The professional counsellor will be using an integrative approach, incorporating Person Centred and Behavioural Therapy techniques in the first session, moving to a Solution Focused approach in the second session. For ease of writing the Professional Counsellor is abbreviated to “C”.

After leaving school at 17, Mark completed a mechanic apprenticeship at a service station owned by his uncle and has worked there ever since. His father died from a heart attack when Mark was six years old and his uncle, who never married, has been a significant influence in his life. He is the youngest of three children, and the only boy in the family. One sister (Anne) is happily married with two children and the other (Erin) is single and works overseas. Mark and his mother have a close relationship, and he was living at home until his marriage.

Some of Mark’s friends are not married and say he was a fool for ‘getting tied down’ so young. Mark used to think that they were just jealous because Sarah is such a ‘knockout’, but lately he has started to wonder if they were right. In the last couple of months, Sarah has been less concerned about her appearance and Mark has commented on this to her. Sarah had been looking for work, but doesn’t seem to do much of anything now.

Three months ago, Sarah found out she can’t have children. According to Mark, she hadn’t spoken about wanting kids so he guessed it wasn’t a big deal to her. When she told him, Mark had joked that at least they wouldn’t have to go into debt to educate them. He thought humour was the best way to go, because he had never been very good at heavy stuff. Sarah had just looked at him and didn’t respond. He asked if she wanted to go out to a movie that night, and she had started to shout at him that he didn’t care about anyone but himself. At that point, he walked out and went to see his brother-in-law, Joe and sister, Anne.

Since then, he and Sarah hardly spoke and when they did it often turned into an argument that ended with Sarah going into the bedroom, slamming the door and crying. Mark usually walked out and drove over to Joe’s place. When Anne tried to talk to Sarah about it, Sarah got angry and told Anne to keep out of it, after all what would she know about it. She had her kids. Joe and Anne had kept their distance since then. Mark talked to his mother, but she said that this was something he and Anne had to work out together. It was she who suggested that Mark come to see C.

Session One

When Mark arrived for the first session, he seemed agitated. C spent some time developing rapport, and eventually Mark seemed to relax a bit. C described the structure of the counselling session, checked if that was ok with Mark, then asked how C could help him.

Mark: “I really wanted Sarah to come; my wife, but she said that I need to sort myself out. I have to tell you, I don’t think counselling is really for men. Women are the ones that like to talk for hours about their problems. I only came here because she insisted and I don’t want her to walk out on me.”

C: “Your marriage is important to you.”

Mark: “Yeah, sure. We’ve had fights before, but they weren’t anything major. And we always made up pretty quickly. But this is different. It seems like whatever I say is wrong, you know? Lately, I haven’t been able to concentrate properly at work and I wake up a lot through the night. I’m feeling really tired and I wish Sarah would get off my case.”

C used encouragers while Mark described what had been happening over the past few months. When he had finished ventilating his immediate concerns, C, moving into Behavioural techniques, summarized and asked Mark to decide what issue he wanted to deal with first. “Mark, you have discussed a number of issues: you are concerned that communication between you and Sarah has been reduced to mostly arguments; you’re unsure how to deal with the fact that Sarah cannot have children; you want to improve your relationship with Sarah; you are worried that Sarah might leave you, and you are feeling very stressed out. What area would you like to work on first?”

Mark: “I just want her to talk to me without arguing. All this is making it really hard for me to concentrate at work, you know.”

C: “Sounds like two goals there, to reduce your stress and to improve communication between Sarah and yourself.”

M: “Yeah, I guess so. If she would just talk to me instead of crying.”

C used open questions and reflections to encourage Mark to look at his feelings. “How do you feel when she goes into the bedroom and starts crying?” Mark: “Well, she’s never been a crier, and I don’t know what to say to her. If I mention not having children, she will probably cry even more.”

C: “So you feel confused about what to do, and anxious that you may upset her even more.”

Mark: “Yes, I just can’t seem to think straight sometimes. Like, I want things to be the way they were, but it’s just getting worse.”

C informed Mark about the use of relaxation techniques to reduce his stress and checked out if he would like to give it a try. “Mark, you appear to be having difficulty coping because you are feeling very stressed. I believe that learning relaxation techniques would decrease the level of stress and help you think more clearly. How does this sound to you?”

Mark: “I’m not into that chanting stuff if that’s what you mean.”

C explained that there are many forms of relaxation and described the deep breathing and muscle tensing method; Mark agreed to do this for 10 minutes twice a day.

As the first session drew to a close, C reviewed the relaxation technique and asked Mark to practise it as often as possible. A second appointment was arranged for the following week.

At the next session, C asked Mark how the relaxation exercise had helped. “I forget to do it some mornings, so I did it for twenty minutes at night instead. I told Sarah what I’m doing and she just leaves me to it. Not sure if it’s making any difference but I’ll keep doing it. It’s nice to have twenty minutes of peace and quiet.” At this point, C moved into a Solution Focused approach.

C congratulated Mark on commencing the relaxation practice, then checked out if it was okay to ask him some different types of questions. Mark agreed and C asked a miracle question. “Imagine that you wake up tomorrow and a miracle has happened. Your problem has been solved. What would other people notice about you that would indicate things are different?”

Mark looked at C, who waited in silence. Eventually Mark responded. “Ok, they would see me and Sarah talking a lot more, without arguing.”

C: “What else would they notice about you?”

Mark: “I would probably be spending more time at home. You know, not staying back so late at work.”

C: “What would they notice that was different about Sarah?”

Mark: “That’s easy. She wouldn’t be crying and yelling all the time.”

C: “So what would she be doing instead?”

Mark: “I guess she would be talking to me, and smiling.”

After spending some time exploring what would be different if the miracle happened, C asked Mark what he had tried in the past to improve communication. Mark revealed that he bought Sarah some flowers and a box of chocolates (his uncle’s suggestion) but it hadn’t really made any difference. C complimented Mark on his efforts and continued with an exception question.

“Can you think of a recent occasion, when you would have expected a quarrel to start and it didn’t?”

Mark furrowed his brow and appeared to be thinking deeply for some time. C waited in silence. Finally, Mark answered. “Actually, about a week ago, I was a bit late home from work and I was expecting another tongue-lashing, but it never came.”

C asked Mark what was different about that night.

Mark: “Well, Sarah was happier.”

C: “How did you know she was happier?”

Mark: “She talked to me, you know, just talked about something she had seen on the telly or something like that.”

C: “And how was that for you, Mark?”

Mark: “Not bad. Actually, it wasn’t too shabby. We did get to chat, and we haven’t done that for ages.”

C: “Can you explain, “Wasn’t too shabby”; I haven’t heard that term before?”

Mark: “Oh, it means it was all good, you know, it was okay.”

C: “So you came home and chatted with Sarah over a cuppa and you found that wasn’t too shabby?” Both smiled

Mark: “I really liked it. I remember thinking I would have come home earlier if I had known it was going to be like that.”

C: “If I was to ask Sarah what was different about that night, what do you think she would say?”

Mark: “Boy, this is getting weird.”

Mark: “Let’s see. She would probably say, “He actually sat and had a cup of coffee with me, instead of just flopping in front of the telly. She’s always griping about that.”

At the appropriate time, C called for a break. “I’d like to take a break and give us both time to consider all the things we’ve talked about. After that, I will give you some feedback.” After the break C summarized what had been discussed and complimented Mark on the work he had put into exploring his problems. He seemed less stressed and had shown that he was committed to improving his relationship with Sarah.

Counselling continued for another three sessions, by which time Mark’s stress had reduced considerably, he was coming home from work earlier and making an effort to talk more to Sarah. The arguments were less frequent and not so heated.

Session Summary

The Person Centred approach allows the client to take the lead and discuss issues as they see them. This encourages the client to talk openly, which was especially useful in this instance since the client showed a reluctance to do so at first.

The Behavioural technique of goal setting is used to clarify what the client wants to achieve out of the sessions.

Solution Focused Therapy, this approach acknowledges that the client has the ability to solve his own problem.

Miracle questions assist the client to examine how they and others would be behaving if the problem were already dealt with. This helps the client to look at their current behaviour and see what they can do to bring about the required change. Exploring what the client has tried in the past highlights that the client is committed to solving the problem. Exception questions help the client to see that there are times when the problem does not occur, and that they have contributed to that situation. This shows the client that they have control over the problem.

Clarifying client’s words, eg. “Not too shabby” shows respect for the client’s language and emphasises that the client is the expert.

Author: Jan McIntyre

Related Case Studies: A Case of Acceptance and Letting Go , A Case of Stress , A Case of Using Logical Consequences

• April 16, 2007
• Case Study , Person-centred , Solution-focused
• Case Studies , Relationship & Families

Comments: 1

Thank you! Very well explained. How to build rapport so that client loosens up.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

• Mental Health Academy

• Case Studies
• Communication Skills
• Counselling Microskills
• Counselling Process
• Children & Families
• Ethical Issues
• Sexuality & Gender Issues
• Neuropsychology
• Practice Management
• Relationship Counselling
• Social Support
• Therapies & Approaches
• Workplace Issues
• Anxiety & Depression
• Personality Disorders
• Self-Harming & Suicide
• Effectiveness Skills
• Stress & Burnout
• Diploma of Counselling
• Diploma of Financial Counselling
• Diploma of Community Services (Case Management)
• Diploma of Youth Work
• Bachelor of Counselling
• Bachelor of Human Services
• Master of Counselling

A Case Using Brief Psychodynamic Therapy

By Leanne Tamplin

Wendy is a 54 year old woman who has two adult children and has been married for twenty-nine years. Her husband, Steve, has recently and unexpectedly informed her that he no longer loves her and that he wants a divorce. Wendy was shocked to hear this, and she now reports that she is constantly crying and feels extremely anxious. Wendy has not told anyone about this situation, although she and Steve have agreed to explain his decision to their children within the week.

In this scenario, the counsellor will be using a brief psychodynamic approach. For ease of writing, the Counsellor is abbreviated to “C”.

Wendy attended eighteen appointments over an eight month period. The first six appointments were held weekly, the next ten were fortnightly, and the last two were spaced out over two months. Wendy and Steve have been married for twenty-nine years and have lived in the same area for all of that time. They have two children – Damien 24 years of age, and Amanda 26 years. Damien still lives at home with his parents.

Wendy has not yet told anyone, neither family nor friends, about her situation and becomes anxious when she considers doing this. She and Steve have agreed to tell their children within the next week, and Steve plans to move out of the family home at that time. Wendy and Steve are no longer sleeping in the same bed, although up until his recent disclosure, they had been sleeping together and kissing and hugging from time to time. Wendy’s reported anxiety/depression symptoms included: difficulty sleeping, difficulty relaxing, thinking about Steve/their marriage/the future all the time, feeling exhausted, feeling “tightness” in her chest and her throat, a loss of appetite, crying several times every day, and a loss of interest in “everything”.

Session Details

In the initial appointment, Wendy reported a very distressing couple of weeks. She began to describe her situation starting at twelve months ago when Steve began attending a gym and reading personal development books. Wendy stated that at that time, Steve seemed to change, and she thought it was a part of a “mid-life crisis” that he would eventually recover from. Around the same time, Wendy confronted Steve because she felt that they weren’t communicating much and she was feeling “left out” of his new interests. At that time, Steve told Wendy that he thought they were “drifting apart”. As a result of this conversation, Wendy then made a concentrated effort to improve things – she created opportunities for them to be together, she encouraged their discussions with one another, and she shared more of herself and her feelings in their conversations. That was the last time they had discussed anything about their relationship, and Wendy thought that things had been much improved by her efforts over the last twelve months. When Steve told her over dinner a week ago that he didn’t feel that he loved her anymore and that he would like a divorce, Wendy was shocked and devastated.

C’s role in these initial stages was to listen, to assist Wendy to expand and elaborate on her story, to help her to identify her emotions, and to provide her with unconditional positive regard and a non-judgmental environment. From a psychodynamic perspective, these early sessions were also about developing a productive therapeutic relationship and trying to understand Wendy’s life from her perspective, that is, to walk in her shoes. C listened empathically and shared in the variety of emotions that Wendy reported, including shock, anger, sadness, devastation, betrayal, disappointment, frustration, disbelief, and a sense of complete lack of control. These were discussed at length, as well as the situations that had caused the emotions. As a brief psychodynamic counsellor expects that there will be around twenty appointments, or more, there was no need to hurry Wendy. C and Wendy travelled through each event and emotion as they occurred.

Wendy reported that although the sessions were difficult, she felt “relief” when she left and looked forward to her next appointment. She described an almost immediate, but minor, decrease in her anxiety symptoms, with a continuing reduction over time. After discussion, she re-introduced the use of her own relaxation strategies that she had used successfully in the past.

C encouraged Wendy to allow herself to express her feelings as much, and as often, as possible. In response to this suggestion, she began a journal and wrote in it regularly, she accepted and catered for times alone to cry, and she gradually began to discuss her situation with close and trusted family, friends, and work colleagues. This latter action required extensive discussion about her fears of disclosure and how she would manage the repercussions.

In the first three appointments, the focus was on “holding” Wendy during her crisis, and on allowing Wendy to express herself and to describe her situation in it’s entirety, without judgment or analysis. After this stage, however, C began reporting to Wendy any observations or thoughts about what was happening for her, as well as identifying patterns in her actions and highlighting significant steps that she had taken. For example, in session seven, C noticed that Wendy was reluctant to criticise Steve for his behaviour. C described this observation to Wendy and asked her if she had noticed it herself. Wendy had not noticed, but once it was brought to her attention, she said that she could see it clearly. She said that she still loved Steve, and that she held onto the hope that he would change his mind. She went on to describe her plan to take him back should that occur. C empathised with the sudden and drastic change that had occurred in Wendy’s life and her plans for the future, and normalised her reaction to cling to the possibility of her life returning to the familiar and to having some feeling of control. C also explored this further, asking Wendy: how likely she thought Steve’s return was; how this event might take place; and how she thought she would respond if it occurred. In this way, Wendy’s beliefs and feelings about Steve were opened up, accepted, and their impact was acknowledged. Wendy was later able to identify the value of this belief in keeping her “together” at this point, and also said that she understood the reality that he was unlikely to return. This is an important occurrence in brief psychodynamic therapy, as it is an example of the unconscious becoming conscious.

At the commencement of the twelfth session, Wendy reported that she had a terrible week where she had cried frequently. She had spoken to Steve and had been very disappointed with his distance and coldness towards her. She described these events while laughing and speaking quickly and minimising their significance. C challenged this incongruence between Wendy’s behaviour and her words, by describing the observation to Wendy. Wendy reported that she was probably speaking fast because she had just met with a friend who would not be able to handle the truth about her devastation. Her quick speaking and laughing, Wendy suggested, was how she acted “together” when she didn’t want people to know how distressed she really was. C asked if this was also how she felt in our counselling sessions (note: from a psychodynamic perspective, often an experience a client is describing in relation to others can be a reflection of the experience they are having in the counselling room). Wendy said that she did want to improve her well-being, and so had hoped that she would be “together” when she came to counselling this time.

C asked Wendy to discuss the consequences of appearing “not together”. During this conversation, Wendy said that she felt that it was hard to be herself and that, in fact, she had not been able to be herself since Steve told her twelve months ago that they were drifting apart. From that time on, she had been acting as if everything was okay, when really she felt scared and alone. C and Wendy then talked about the possible impact of this kind of “pretending” on her marital relationship, on the counselling relationship, and on her relationships generally. They discussed where this behaviour may have been learned (Wendy felt it was from her parents’ relationship) and what had caused her to begin using it. After some long conversation about this, Wendy admitted that she had not been happy in her marriage for some time because she was afraid of losing Steve and afraid of being “left out”. It was at that point that she saw her “pretending” in her marriage as a form of self-protection.

During this conversation, Wendy also said that laughing about her problems was to make it easier for her friend to cope with the sad news. Wendy realised that she tried to make her distress easier for everyone to cope with, including Steve. She reported that she was even making it as easy as possible for Steve to leave her. She decided then that she would no longer do this, and would instead be true to her own feelings and express them whenever necessary. She stated that she would start to be herself around Steve, and everyone else. From this point on in our sessions, whenever she noticed herself laughing and talking fast about her sadness, she slowed down, took a deep breath, and connected with her true self. Developing this kind of insight is integral to successful brief psychodynamic therapy, and it sometimes starts with the counsellor paying attention to a small but significant occurrence within the therapy room.

From session fourteen, Wendy began a level of mourning for the lost relationship and her lost future – she described the loss as if she had begun accepting that it was really over. Wendy decided to bring family photos to counselling and reflected on the great events in their marriage. Wendy also started speaking more easily about negative experiences in their marriage and described times when she had felt taken advantage of and belittled. C saw this as evidence of Wendy’s increasing acceptance of the reality that the marriage was not perfect, and also as a way for Wendy to move further away from it.

Wendy often stated “what do I do now?”. C encouraged Wendy to begin to think about the things she had always wanted to do but had sacrificed when she married to have a family. Over time, Wendy made some solid decisions about her future concerning:

• Full-time work
• Disclosing her story to others
• Travelling to an island for a holiday
• Not waiting for Steve’s next move before she made hers
• Making some goals for the next two years that she could achieve with or without Steve

When Wendy raised fears of her ability to accomplish the goals she had set herself, C would encourage her to reflect on the personal traits she had demonstrated in counselling, and in her ability to handle Steve’s decision. In particular, she could see her own strength, her courage, and her honesty with herself as attributes that could get her through. Gradually, Wendy became more assertive and started living her life “as if” he would not come back, even though she continued to hope that he would return.

Wendy was keen to start thinking about ending counselling in session sixteen. C and Wendy agreed to two more appointments over two months in order to reflect on her progress over the last six months and identify how she would continue to progress without counselling. At session eighteen, Wendy’s anxiety symptoms were no longer present and she was feeling more in control of her life. She continued to cry and mourn her lost relationship regularly, although the frequency of her tears had greatly reduced.

Key Concepts of Brief Psychodynamic Therapy Applied:

• Developing a positive therapeutic relationship, including the use of empathy
• “Holding” a client through a crisis – not physically, but psychological holding to give them a sense of stability and certainty.
• Looking at the here-and-now in the counselling relationship
• Making the unconscious, conscious and fostering insight
• The underlying belief that providing a safe environment for a client to explore their experiences will give them the opportunity to understand themselves better, change their patterns, and make sense of the situations at hand.

Subscribe to our newsletter

You’ll regularly receive powerful strategies for personal development, tips to improve the growth of your counselling practice, the latest industry news, and much more.

Keyword search

AIPC specialises in providing high quality counselling and community services courses, with a particular focus on highly supported external education. AIPC is the largest provider of counselling courses in the Australia, with over 27 years specialist experience.

Learn more: www.aipc.net.au

Recent Posts

• Men and Emotions: From Repression to Expression
• Men, Emotions and Alexithymia
• The Fine Art of Compassion
• The Benefits of Intentional Daydreaming
• Solution-focused Techniques in Counselling

Recommended Websites

• Australian Counselling Association
• Life Coaching Institute

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Counselling psychology case study

The paper analyses a counselling session between a teacher and a new student

Related Papers

IJIRT Journal

Mental Health has always been a matter of stigma in society. Any physical health issue or injury is treated with concern and immediate medical attention is sought for the same. But it is considered a shame and stigma to talk about mental health or seek help for the same. Mental health has become a matter of concern present days and it affects all irrespective of age. Counseling has served as one of those professions that has proved its effectiveness and has been highly attached to the arena of education. Yet, despite its significance, the inculcation of the qualities of counselors in the teaching profession, importance of counseling as a teacher and the role of teacher as a counselor have been spoken at length in scarce occasions.

Canadian Journal of Counselling and Psychotherapy Revue Canadienne De Counseling Et De Psychotherapie

Bryan Hiebert

Anoop C Choolayil

counseling is gaining relevance in educational settings owing to the emotional and mental stress exerted by educational practices. This paper gives some basic ideas of educational counseling

Martin Milton

SMART M O V E S J O U R N A L IJELLH

Counselling and Education: An integrated approach The need for counselling in schools has gained much attention in the past few years. An increasing number of students experiencing problems and challenges in different facets of life make it imperative that teachers also start assuming the role of counselor. This paper highlights some of the major developments in counselling programmes in India. An attempt has also been made to stress the important linkages between teaching and counselling. Counselling is the skilled and principled use of a relationship to facilitate self knowledge, emotional acceptance and growth, and the optimal development of personal resources. The overall aim is to provide an opportunity to work towards living more satisfyingly and resourcefully (British Association of Counselling, 1991). This definition is in accord with the way counselling should be used in schools. The goals identified in the definition are the one's which are encompassed by the overall aims of education. Schools aim to facilitate their students' self knowledge and emotional acceptance. They also aim to promote personal growth and optimal development of each student's potential, the ultimate aim of education being to produce contented, productive and resourceful citizen. In schools, the relationship referred to in the definition is typically not one counselor to client but that of teacher to pupil.

Journal Space and Culture, India Open access Journal

Counselling is a purposeful understanding of a person so as to promote self-understanding in that person. There is an urgent need of introducing and strengthening the counselling service in the schools and colleges to meet the various needs of the students. Along with the intellectual development, proper motivation and clarification of goals and ideas to pupils in conformity with their basic potentialities and social tendencies are important for the total development of the student. Professional counsellors in educational settings ought to develop and deliver comprehensive counselling programme supporting and promoting student achievement, which should include a systematic and planned programme delivery involving all students and enhancing the learning process. This study is based on the review of secondary literature in an attempt to highlight the utmost relevance of counselling services in an educational setting.

Counselling Psychology Quarterly

Malcolm Cross

Christina Athanasiades

The New Educational Review

Slađana Zuković

Counselling has played a part in the role of educating school students, giving us the opportunity to lead a happier life and feel good about our background as well as learn to deal with obstacles. In this paper, the aim of this discussion will be: (i) the change that can be observed when counselling takes place; and (ii) how effective the change that affects students. These two main objectives will be discussed in three types of data namely the literature review, data from interviews, and other resources such as journals, articles, and websites.

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

The 3-Word Remedy for Anxiety

The liberating power of "so, what if": speculative thinking reduces anxiety..

Updated April 9, 2024 | Reviewed by Michelle Quirk

• What Is Anxiety?
• Find counselling to overcome anxiety
• Consistent with the cognitive behavioral therapy approach, speculative thinking challenges your anxiety.
• The phrase, "So what if?" is a great way to use speculative thinking to zap your worries.
• "So what if?" helps us find the freedom to explore alternatives to anxious thoughts and see a brighter future.

Anxiety often lurks in our minds, weaving its tendrils into our thoughts and emotions. It's a persistent companion, whispering doubts, fears, and uncertainties.

Yet, amidst this mental maze, lies a powerful tool—the simple question: "So, what if?" Further along in this post, I will share Sarah's story—a brief, inspiring case study of the power of "So, what if?"

This idea of challenging our irrational beliefs is soundly based on the tenets of cognitive behavioral therapy —the most widely researched set of clinical interventions used by mental health professionals. Similar to "So, what if?," the question, "What is the worst thing that can happen?" is another worry squashed. That's because most of the time, the worst thing does not happen—and even if it does, we usually find a way to deal with it when push comes to shove.

Yet, I still prefer the 1, 2, 3 punch of "So, what if?" This three-word question is more succinct, and it effectively calls on us to step up and directly call out and challenge that irrational self-talk that gets in our way.

This seemingly innocuous inquiry holds the key to unlocking a path toward liberation from anxiety's grip. By engaging in speculative thinking, we venture into the realm of possibility, where anxieties lose their potency, and we find the freedom to explore alternatives and envision brighter futures.

Understanding Anxiety

Anxiety, in its essence, is a response to uncertainty and perceived threats. It manifests as a relentless cycle of worry, ruminating on potential dangers and negative outcomes. Whether it's fretting about the future, dwelling on past mistakes, or feeling overwhelmed by current challenges, anxiety constrains our ability to think clearly and act decisively. It's a cognitive trap that ensnares us in a web of "what ifs" without offering resolution or relief.

The Power of Speculative Thinking: Enter "So, What If?"

A subtle yet transformative shift in perspective: Instead of succumbing to the paralyzing grip of anxious thoughts, we pivot toward curiosity and imagination . Speculative thinking invites us to entertain possibilities beyond the confines of our fears.

When I was researching my book The Anxiety, Depression , & Anger Toolbox for Teens , I learned how speculative thinking is a valuable tool to quell not just teen anxiety but also worries amongst people of all ages. Speculative thinking encourages us to explore alternative narratives, envision positive outcomes, and consider the potential for growth and resilience .

Lowering Anxiety Through Speculation

• Reframing perspectives: "So, what if?" prompts us to reframe our perspectives on uncertainty and adversity. Rather than viewing challenges as insurmountable obstacles, we see them as opportunities for learning and growth. By embracing uncertainty as a natural part of life's journey, we cultivate resilience and adaptability.
• Empowering choices: Speculative thinking empowers us to reclaim agency in the face of anxiety. Instead of feeling helpless and overwhelmed, we recognize that our choices shape the course of our lives. By exploring different scenarios and their potential outcomes, we gain clarity and confidence in our decision-making process.
• Cultivating creativity : Anxiety often stifles creativity, trapping us in rigid patterns of thinking. "So, what if?" unleashes the imagination, inviting us to explore uncharted territory and envision novel solutions. By embracing uncertainty as a catalyst for innovation, we tap into our creative potential and discover new possibilities.
• Building resilience: Speculative thinking fosters resilience by challenging us to confront our fears and uncertainties head-on. Rather than avoiding discomfort, we lean into it, recognizing that growth often emerges from adversity. By embracing the unknown with courage and curiosity, we develop the inner strength to navigate life's inevitable challenges.

Case Study: Sarah's Story

Sarah, a young professional commercial realtor, was plagued by anxiety about her career prospects. Faced with uncertainty in her industry's mounting pressure to succeed, she felt paralyzed by fear of failure.

However, through the practice of speculative thinking, Sarah began to explore alternative pathways and envision a future filled with possibilities. Instead of dwelling on worst-case scenarios, she asked herself, "So, what if I believe I can succeed? What if I give my best effort? So, what if this career does not work out—I will find something else that is a better fit for me. In the meantime, I'm giving this my best shot."

These questions liberated Sarah from the grip of anxiety, empowering her to take proactive steps toward her goals with newfound clarity and confidence. One of Sarah's colleagues who saw that she appeared more optimistic , empowered, and motivated invited her to assist with a large sale. Sarah leveraged this success to propel herself forward and became a rising star in her office.

"So, what if?"—a simple question with profound implications for our mental well-being. In a world fraught with uncertainty and anxiety, speculative thinking offers a beacon of hope and possibility. By embracing curiosity, creativity, and resilience, we can transcend the confines of anxious thoughts and chart a course toward a brighter, more fulfilling future. So, the next time anxiety threatens to overshadow your daily life and even your dreams , remember to ask yourself: "So, what if?"

Apolinário-Hagen, J., Drüge, M., Fritsche, L. (2020). Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy and Acceptance Commitment Therapy for Anxiety Disorders: Integrating Traditional with Digital Treatment Approaches. In: Kim, YK. (eds) Anxiety Disorders. Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology, vol 1191. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-32-9705-0_17

van Dis EAM, van Veen SC, Hagenaars MA, et al. Long-term Outcomes of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Anxiety-Related Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA Psychiatry. 2020;77(3):265–273. doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2019.3986

Jeffrey Bernstein, Ph.D. , is a psychologist and the author of seven books, including 10 Days to a Less Defiant Child.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Support Group
• International
• New Zealand
• South Africa
• Switzerland
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Therapy Center NEW
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

Understanding what emotional intelligence looks like and the steps needed to improve it could light a path to a more emotionally adept world.

• Coronavirus Disease 2019
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

Main Navigation

• Accept offer and enrol
• Current Students

Personalise your experience

Did you mean..., diploma of arts and social sciences, art/science collaboration wins waterhouse natural science art prize, unit of study psyc5003 research methods for psychology practitioners (2025).

Future students: T: 1800 626 481 E: Email your enquiry here

Current students: Contact: Faculty of Health

Students studying at an education collaboration: Please contact your relevant institution

updated - DO NOT REMOVE THIS LINE 6:08 AM on Tue, 9 April

Show me unit information for year

Unit snapshot.

PG Coursework Unit

Credit points

Faculty & college.

Faculty of Health

Unit description

Equips students with skills to be a scientist-practitioner, including critically reviewing translational research evidence to inform psychological practice, and understanding limitations of evidence-based practice. Students will learn how to design applied research to examine the effectiveness of psychology interventions, including ethical and cultural considerations. Case study design (including N = 1), qualitative analysis, and statistics for psychology practitioners will be covered. Students will also learn how to critically appraise practitioner research methods.

Unit content

• The scientist-practitioner model
• Critically review evidence used by psychology practitioners including research methodology
• Translational research
• Design applied research for psychology
• Single-case research design
• Research methods and statistics appropriate for psychology practitioners

Availabilities

2025 unit offering information will be available in November 2024

Learning outcomes

Unit Learning Outcomes express learning achievement in terms of what a student should know, understand and be able to do on completion of a unit. These outcomes are aligned with the graduate attributes . The unit learning outcomes and graduate attributes are also the basis of evaluating prior learning.

On completion of this unit, students should be able to:

critically appraise and interpret research evidence to guide professional practice in psychology

investigate a substantive research question in professional psychology

design a single-case research study for psychology

select and perform appropriate research methods and statistics for psychology practitioners

Fee information

Commonwealth Supported courses For information regarding Student Contribution Amounts please visit the Student Contribution Amounts .

Fee paying courses For postgraduate or undergraduate full-fee paying courses please check Domestic Postgraduate Fees OR Domestic Undergraduate Fees .

International

Please check the international course and fee list to determine the relevant fees.

Courses that offer this unit

Master of professional psychology (2025), master of professional psychology (2024), any questions we'd love to help.

This degree is offered through the School of Online Studies. The Psychology degree with a Counseling Concentration has been designed with an emphasis on counseling and psychology content. The curriculum focuses on issues of development, diversity, and human behavior and is designed for students desiring entry-level positions or preparation for graduate studies.

Required Courses for the Psychology/Counseling B.S. Degree

I. christian studies core - 15-21 credits.

• ICS 3610 - Concepts of Global and Ethical Leadership 3 Credits *
• THE 3701 - Apologetics and Christian Evidences 3 Credits *
• BIB 1511 - Survey of Biblical Literature 3 Credits *
• BIB 1520 - History of the Old Testament 3 Credits
• BIB 1522 - History of the New Testament 3 Credits
• BIB 3510 - Interpreting the Gospels 3 Credits
• BIB 4710 - Interpreting Romans 3 Credits
• THE 3520 - Foundations of Christian Thought 3 Credits *
• THE 3522 - Systematic Theology I 3 Credits
• THE 3524 - Systematic Theology II 3 Credits

II. General Education Core - 30 Credits

• COM 1010 - Introduction to Communication 3 Credits
• COM - Communication Elective 3 Credits
• Communication, Humanities, Math, Science or Social Science Electives 9 Credits
• ENG 1510 - College Writing and Research 3 Credits
• ENG 1512 - Introduction to Literary Analysis 3 Credits
• Literature Elective 3 Credits
• MAT - Math Elective 3 Credits
• SCI - Science Elective 3 Credits
• Social Science Elective 3 Credits
• SOC 1510 - College Success Strategies 3 Credits 1,2

III. Major Core - 39 Credits

• MAT 2230 - Statistical Concepts 3 Credits *
• PSY 130 - General Psychology 3 Credits *
• PSY 236 - Developmental Psychology 3 Credits *
• PSY 240X - Social Science Research Methods 3 Credits *
• PSY 3060 - Diversity Issues in Counseling 3 Credits *
• PSY 331 - Personality Theories 3 Credits
• PSY 337 - Understanding Psychopathology 3 Credits
• PSY 3538 - Theories of Counseling and Psychotherapy 3 Credits
• PSY 3542 - Methods of Counseling 3 Credits
• PSY 431X - Social Psychology 3 Credits
• PSY 442 - Marriage and Family Counseling 3 Credits
• PSY 4533 - Group Dynamics 3 Credits
• PSY 4546 - Crisis Intervention 3 Credits

IV. Electives - 41 Credits*

A minimum of 36 credits must be at the upper (3000-4000) level for a bachelor degree.

* Some courses from the Christian Studies Core and Major Core can be used to fulfill requirements in the General Education Core. By doing that the number of electives needed would increase so that the minimum of 125 credits is reached.

Total - 125 Credits

1 Counts towards 3 credits of Social Science credits. Students who have successfully completed 60 credits with a GPA of at least a 2.0 may replace  SOC 1510    with a Communication, Humanities, Math, Science or Social Science elective.

2 Click HERE to view options for Humanities and Social Science Electives.

Option: Accelerated Degree Program

Qualified students in the B.S. in Psychology/Counseling program may apply for an accelerated degree program to earn their M.A. in Counseling    degree in an additional two years instead of the typical three years. Click here for more detailed information regarding the acceptance process for this option.

Course Requirements for MA/Counseling

Students who are accepted into the accelerated  M.A. in Counseling    program will substitute the following graduate level courses into the undergraduate degree to fulfill the B.S. Psychology/Counseling requirements.

Click for more information about the M.A. in Counseling    program.

Click here to determine if the Counseling M.A. degree meets the requirements for licensure in your state.