PDF (Español (España))
FLIP
Authors who publish in this journal agree to the following terms:
Acta Colombiana de Psicología complies with international intellectual property and copyright laws, and particularly with Article No. 58 of the Political Constitution of Colombia, Law No. 23 of 1982, and the Agreement No. 172 of September 30, 2010 (Universidad Católica de Colombia Intellectual Property Regulation).
Authors retain their copyright and grant to the Acta Colombiana de Psicología the right of first publication, with the work registered under Creative Commons attribution license, which allows third parties to use the published material, provided they credit the authorship of the work and the first publication in this Journal.
Abstract
The aim of this research was to carry out the empirical validation of the clinical formulation model founded on basic processes and proposed by Castro and Angel (1998). A quasi-experimental trans-sectional descriptive and comparative design with three groups was used. Participants were thirty psychologists assigned to the three groups according to their academic background and clinical experience (novice, intermediate an expert). They received written information about a clinical case in order to formulate it using Castro and Angel’s model. Validity indexes were obtained by calculating the percentage of agreements between the formulations of the three groups and a reference formulation; a special instrument was designed for this purpose. The statistical tests H of Kruskal-Wallis and W of Kendall were also used. Results showed that, in general, the model oriented the development of the formulations in the majority of aspects regardless the clinician’s level of experience. This points out the empirical validity of the model; nevertheless, the levels of agreement were not high and the differences lie in one of the model’s basic categories. This is the first study aimed at validating Castro and Angel’s model; its results will allow the restructuring of that model and in turn will lay the foundations for validating it in future research projects.
References
Ballesteros de Valderrama, B.P., Caycedo C., Novoa M. & García D.R. (2006) Validación de un protocolo de formulación de caso clínico desde las categorías de bienestar psicológico. Documento inédito de trabajo.
Bieling, P. & Kuyken, W. (2003). Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 10, 1, 52-69.
Caballo, V. (2002). Manual de tratamiento cognitivo- conductual de los trastornos psicológicos. Madrid: siglo XXI.
Castro, L. & Ángel, E. (1998). Formulación clínica conductual. En V. E. Caballo (comp.) Manual para el tratamiento cognitivo-conductual de los trastornos psicológicos. Vol. II (Pg. 3 – 69). Madrid: Siglo XXI.
Eells, T., Kendjelic, E. & Lucas, C. (1998). What´ s in a Case Formulation? Development and Use of a Content Coding Manual. Journal of Psychotherapy Practice and Research, 7, 2, 144-153.
Eells,T.D.(1997) Handbook of Psychotherapy Case Formulation. New York: Guilford Press.
Eells, T. (2001). Update on Psychotherapy Case Formulation Research. Journal of Psychotherapy Practice and Research, 10, 4, 277-278.
Eells, T. & Lombart, K. (2003). Case formulation and treatment concepts among novice, experienced, and expert cognitive behavioral and psychodynamic therapists. Psychotherapy Research. 13, 2, 187-204.
Eells, T., Lombart, K., Kendjelic, E., Turner, C., & Lucas, C. (2005). The Quality of Psychotherapy Case Formulations: A Comparison of Expert, Experienced, and Novice Cognitive–Behavioral and Psychodynamic Therapists. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 73, 4, 579–589.
Haynes, S. & O’Brien, W (2000). Principles and practice of behavioral assessment. New York: Kluwer/Plenum.
Haynes, S., Richard, D. & Kubany, E. (1995). Content Validity in Psychological Assessment: A Functional Approach to Concepts and Methods. Psychological Assessment. Vol. 7, No. 3, 238-247.
Haynes, S. & Williams, A. (2003). Case Formulation and Design of Behavioral Treatment Programs. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 19, 3, 164–174.
Hernández, R.; Fernández, C. & Baptista, P. (1997). Metodología de la Investigación. México: Mc. Graw-Hill.
Kendjelic, E. & Eells, T. (2007). Generic Psychotherapy Case Formulation Training Improves Formulation Quality. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 44, 1, 66–77.
Kuyken, W. (2006). Evidence Based Case Formulation: Is the Emperor Clothed? En N. Tarrier (edit) Case Formulation in Cognitive Behaviour Therapy: The Treatment of Challenging and Complex Cases. London: Routledge.
Messer, S. (1991). The Case Formulation Approach: Issues of Reliability and Validity. American Psychologist. 1348-1350.
Mumma, G. & Smith, J. (2001). Cognitive-Behavioral-Interpersonal Scenarios: Inter formulator Reliability and Convergent Validity. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 23, 4, 203-221.
Muñoz, M. (2003). Manual práctico de evaluación psicológica clínica. Madrid: Ed. Síntesis.
Persons J. & Bertagnolli, A. (1999). Inter-Rater Reliability of Cognitive-Behavioral Case Formulations of Depression: A Replication. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 23, 3, 271-283.
Persons, J., Mooney, A. & Padesky, C. (1995). Interrater Reliability of Cognitive-Behavioral Case Formulations. Cognitive Research and Therapy. 19, 1, 21-34.
Tarrier, N. & Calam, R. (2002). New developments in cognitive behavioural case formulation. Epidemiological, systemic and social context: An integrative approach. Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 30, 3, 311-328.
Westmeyer, H. (2003). On the structure of case formulations. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 19, 3, 210-216.
