Have you ever wondered why some of your clients find it more difficult to spot improvement than others? They seem tied into a pathological model of themselves that fails to recognise their own resources, successes or potentials.
I had two new clients in July who illustrated this well. One, whom we’ll call Joe, had multiple problems ranging from obesity and emphysema through to OCD. He had been seen by a range of other professionals already. He also had a diagnosis of ASD (Autistic Spectrum Disorder). His referral letter was perfunctory and I got the feeling that he’d been “sent” to get him off someone else’s back.
The other client was one whom we’ll call Carl. Carl is a lawyer. He’s bright, is able to grasp psychological principles easily and has problems relating to work stress triggered by his wife’s illness.
I’ve seen both of them three times now. Who do you think is turning out to be the easier to work with?
You probably think this is a trick question and so have said Joe. And you’d be right. When I asked Carl for examples of where he hadn’t failed in his life, he said there was no point because these were “miniscule”. Joe finds it easier to spot success than Carl does.
I mention this because our Brief Solution Focused Therapy (BSFT) training specialises in enhancing clients’ capacity to detect positive change in themselves and others. It does this in a variety of ways by using the client’s selective attention. By selectively attending to positive change clients begin to orientate towards it and automatically produce more of it. Get more details by clicking here: http://skillsdevelopment.co.uk/seminars.php?courseid=43
Brief Solution is sometimes accused, however, of being overly optimistic or only useable with “easy clients”. This doesn’t fit with the evidence base, but you know how myths develop… Further more this belief doesn’t this fit the situation with Joe and Carl – it happens to be the exact opposite!
Recent research from the University of Edinburgh suggests a reason for it which also turns our client assumptions on their head.
Dr Sue Fletcher-Watson and her colleagues in Edinburgh* have a special interest in “change detection” and ASD (Autistic Spectrum Disorder). The capacity (or otherwise) for “change detection” is, of course, a well-established psychological process – as is its converse “inattentional blindness” – the repeated failure to see self-evident things happening because we are not expecting them or attending to them. Dr Fletcher-Watson discovered that ASD children aged 11-16 are substantially more able to detect changes in visual scenes than both “normal” children AND adults.
This fits with many Brief Solutions Therapists empirical experience that ASD can be viewed as an ASSET in therapy rather than a deficit. Paradoxical as it sounds – this is one of the strength of BSFT amongst many others. Get more solution focused tools for your therapeutic toolkit with difficult and complex clients by signing up here: http://skillsdevelopment.co.uk/seminars.php?courseid=70
It will be interesting to see how Joe and Carl work out. I’ll keep you updated. However, I’m sure this situation isn’t unique and I’m interested in YOUR thoughts on it.
What clients have YOU worked with where you’ve found that their therapeutic response challenged assumptions about their ability to change? WHY do you think this was?
Write to me and let me know. I’m genuinely interested…. as I’m sure others would be too. Your responses will be published anonymously in our blog: http://sdsmedia.blogspot.com/
Best Wishes and looking forward to seeing you soon on one of our training courses.
Paul
• *Fletcher-Watson, S., Leekam, S., Connolly, B., Collis, J., Findlay, J., McConachie, H., and Rodgers, J. (2011). Attenuation of change blindness in children with autism spectrum disorders. British Journal of Developmental Psychology
Showing posts with label research. Show all posts
Showing posts with label research. Show all posts
Wednesday, 21 September 2011
Friday, 8 October 2010
SDS Report: What’s the Ideal Size for a Therapy Group?
As you remember we promised to share with you our report on the ideal group size based on your responses.The report is now available here: http://www.skillsdevelopment.co.uk/seminars.php?courseid=67
– just follow the link: “Is there such a thing as the “ideal” group size? We asked our delegates of their opinions on the subject. Read our report based on your replies here.”
– just follow the link: “Is there such a thing as the “ideal” group size? We asked our delegates of their opinions on the subject. Read our report based on your replies here.”
You still can add your comments to this discussion in our blog: http://sdsmedia.blogspot.com/2010/09/request-for-help-whats-ideal-size-for.html or contribute to many other debates of hot topics in psychology and health care: http://sdsmedia.blogspot.com/
Tuesday, 5 October 2010
Nutrients in milk link to obesity
Taken from yahoo news:
Feeding babies milk enriched with nutrients to promote faster weight gain in infancy makes them fatter later in life, researchers have suggested.
Body fat mass in five to eight-year-olds was 22% to 38% greater in those who were given nutrient-enriched milk as babies than those who had standard formula, according to a team based at the University College London Institute of Child Health.
Researchers looked at two randomised, controlled, double blind studies - where neither they nor the mothers knew which kind of milk they were assigned - involving small newborn babies in hospitals in Cambridge, Nottingham, Leicester and Glasgow.
Mothers who had no plans to breastfeed were given either standard formula milk or a formula containing extra protein, energy-boosters, vitamins and minerals.
In the first study, which was conducted on 299 babies between 1993 and 1995, the formula was used for nine months.
Researchers then measured the body fat of 153 (51%) of the children in their homes between 1999 and 2002.
The second study involved 246 infants between 2003 and 2005 - until it was stopped early due to evidence of the link between early over-nutrition and later obesity - of whom 90 (37%) were followed up to assess fat levels in 2008-09.
Professor Atul Singhal, from the MRC Childhood Nutrition Research Centre, UCL Institute of Child Health, who led the study, said: "This study robustly demonstrates a link between early nutrition and having more fat in later life in humans - a finding suggested by previous studies and confirmed in many other animals."
It is interesting to think that what we eat/drink in infancy can have such a poweful affect on our lives in adulthood.
Link to Article
Feeding babies milk enriched with nutrients to promote faster weight gain in infancy makes them fatter later in life, researchers have suggested.
Body fat mass in five to eight-year-olds was 22% to 38% greater in those who were given nutrient-enriched milk as babies than those who had standard formula, according to a team based at the University College London Institute of Child Health.
Researchers looked at two randomised, controlled, double blind studies - where neither they nor the mothers knew which kind of milk they were assigned - involving small newborn babies in hospitals in Cambridge, Nottingham, Leicester and Glasgow.
Mothers who had no plans to breastfeed were given either standard formula milk or a formula containing extra protein, energy-boosters, vitamins and minerals.
In the first study, which was conducted on 299 babies between 1993 and 1995, the formula was used for nine months.
Researchers then measured the body fat of 153 (51%) of the children in their homes between 1999 and 2002.
The second study involved 246 infants between 2003 and 2005 - until it was stopped early due to evidence of the link between early over-nutrition and later obesity - of whom 90 (37%) were followed up to assess fat levels in 2008-09.
Professor Atul Singhal, from the MRC Childhood Nutrition Research Centre, UCL Institute of Child Health, who led the study, said: "This study robustly demonstrates a link between early nutrition and having more fat in later life in humans - a finding suggested by previous studies and confirmed in many other animals."
It is interesting to think that what we eat/drink in infancy can have such a poweful affect on our lives in adulthood.
Link to Article
Wednesday, 22 September 2010
Vocabulary and Self-regulation
Developing language skills appears to be more important for boys than girls in helping them to develop self-control and, ultimately, succeed in school.
The study is the first to suggest language skills have a bigger impact on boys' self-regulation than on girls'.
As with previous research, Vallotton and Ayoub found that language skills - specifically the building of vocabulary - help children regulate their emotions and behavior and that boys lag behind girls in both language skills and self-regulation.
While girls overall seemed to have a more natural ability to control themselves and focus, boys with a strong vocabulary showed a dramatic increase in this ability to self-regulate.
But why is self regulation important? Good self-regulation results in better personal-study, which aids school-learning as well, resulting in better exam results. But why does vocabulary change this? Surely if you want to learn, then you'll want to learn - regardless of vocabulary?
Well, perhaps the fact that the child has a strong vocabulary is indicitive of the fact that they enjoy learning in the first place, so is not so much a cause of greater self-regulation but a result of.
In either case, it is another interesting study that shows how early life experience really can shape our future.
Link to Article
The study is the first to suggest language skills have a bigger impact on boys' self-regulation than on girls'.
As with previous research, Vallotton and Ayoub found that language skills - specifically the building of vocabulary - help children regulate their emotions and behavior and that boys lag behind girls in both language skills and self-regulation.
While girls overall seemed to have a more natural ability to control themselves and focus, boys with a strong vocabulary showed a dramatic increase in this ability to self-regulate.
But why is self regulation important? Good self-regulation results in better personal-study, which aids school-learning as well, resulting in better exam results. But why does vocabulary change this? Surely if you want to learn, then you'll want to learn - regardless of vocabulary?
Well, perhaps the fact that the child has a strong vocabulary is indicitive of the fact that they enjoy learning in the first place, so is not so much a cause of greater self-regulation but a result of.
In either case, it is another interesting study that shows how early life experience really can shape our future.
Link to Article
Thursday, 3 June 2010
Drinking coffee doesn't make you more alert, caffeine study reveals
Coffee drinkers may think they're getting a caffeine boost, but they're no more alert than people who never drink the stuff.
The millions of people who depend on a shot of coffee to kickstart their day are no more alert than those who are not regular coffee drinkers, say researchers.
A cup of coffee, suggests a study, only counteracts the effects of caffeine withdrawal that has built up overnight.
"Someone who consumes caffeine regularly when they're at work but not at weekends runs the risk of feeling a bit rubbish by Sunday," said Peter Rogers, who led the research at Bristol University. "It's better to stick with it or keep off it altogether."
The research is significant because previous studies into the effects of caffeine have involved far fewer participants.
"It's an interesting piece of evidence, and a very ambitious study," said Lorenzo Stafford, a psychologist at the University of Portsmouth. "Getting the DNA samples of so many participants is a huge effort."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
