Qualitative meta-analysis of insight events in psychotherapy

Abstract

Purpose: This study reports on a qualitative meta-analysis examining the phenomenon of insight into psychotherapy. Method: Studies (n = 7, covering 15 insight events of 15 clients) were selected that examined significant events in psychotherapy leading to insight using session recordings and Interpersonal Process Recall interviews with clients and therapists. A conceptual organization of the data using a matrix grid consisting of three domains according to data origin (client process, therapist process, and their interaction) and three domains according to events’ sequence (context, event and key intervention, and impact) was established. Results: Key processes were identified that lead to insight events in psychotherapy. Two distinct types of events according to their main impacts as reported by the clients were identified: Painful/Poignant Insight where clients realized something that was painful, often evoking feelings of sadness or undifferentiated upset containing sadness and hurt; and Self-Asserting/Empowering Insight that led to an impact characterized by a sense of self-assertion and empowerment on the client’s part. A reasonably good alliance and vulnerability on the client’s part represent the context for insight events as does the client’s quest for self-understanding. The therapists’ key interventions in the event leading to poignant/painful insight contain either empathic reflection or collaborative interpretation. In empowerment/self-assertive insight events the therapists offer supportive, validating reframing promoting positive experience. In both types of events the therapist and the client work on consolidating insight. In some events, therapists emphasized cognitive or problem solution focused impacts, while clients emphasized emotional impacts. Some events contained emotional avoidance on the part of the client or therapist thus not realizing the full potential of the event.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 52 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.