Conclusion

This transtheoretical model builds on and further develops simple distinctions generally observed in clinical practice. By so doing it appears to capture more of the complexity involved in the therapeutic use of mental imagery; particularly in relation to the way that images operate as potent communication agents allowing a productive and interactive dialogue between the rational and imaginal perspectives. Although in its early stages of development, its base and structure appear to be sound and it has the potential to offer a helpful more inclusive framework for practice. However, the test of a model’s usefulness lies in its application to therapeutic practice. In Part Two I will discuss the contribution this model can make to more inclusive practice.

References

Ahsen A. (1984). ‘ISM: The Triple Code model for imagery and psychophysiology’, Journal of Mental Imagery, 8, 4: 15-42.

Bamber, M. (2004). ‘ “The good, the bad and defenceless Jimmy” - a single case study of Schema Mode Therapy’, Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, 11: 425-438.

Chestnut, W. J. (1971). ‘Directed Imagery: A means for dealing with patient defensiveness’, Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 8, 4: 325-327.

Clarkson, P. (2003). The Therapeutic Relationship, 2nd edn, Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.

Malamud, D. (1973). ‘Self-confrontation Methods in Psychotherapy’, Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 10, 2: 123-130.

Shorr, J. E. (1983). Psychotherapy through Imagery, 4th edn, New York: Thieme-Stratton Inc.

Thomas, V. (2011). The Therapeutic Functions of Mental Imagery in Psychotherapy: Constructing a theoretical model, Unpublished DPsych. thesis. Held in Middlesex University e-repository available at: http://eprints.mdx.ac.uk/10561

 
Source
< Prev   CONTENTS   Source   Next >