Therapists Have a lot to Add to the Field of Research, but Many Don’t Make it There: A Narrative Thematic Inquiry into Counsellors’ and Psychotherapists’ Embodied Engagement with Research

Research frequently addresses a gap between practice and research in the field of psychotherapy. Castonguay et al (2010) suggest that the practice of many full-time psychotherapists is rarely or nonsubstantially influenced by research. Boisvert and Faust (2005) ask ‘why do psychotherapists not rely on the research to consistently inform their practice?’ and suggest that concerns ‘have echoed through the decades’ about psychotherapists’ failings to integrate of research and practice. This study focuses on therapists’ (counsellors and psychotherapists) reasoning about their engagement with ‘research’ as described in dissertations and in personal, anonymously presented documents, research journals and interviews included. The study focuses on the stages which generally are referred to as ‘data analysis’, which in this study refers research stages where interpretation typically is required with synthesising and analysing in mind. Turning our attention to the therapists’ ‘narrative knowing’ about research during these stages where generating own new knowledge is put to the forefront, have highlighted a complex relationship involving epistemological discrepancies, real or imagined, between practice and research. It also highlighted gender issues, culture and commonly held constructs about what constitutes a ‘counsellor’, which we believe influence therapists’ presence in research. We decided to include the citation “Therapists have a lot to add to the field of research, but many don’t make it there” in the title to illustrate some of the complexity. The study is based on a Professional Doctorate programme, which engages with psychologists, counsellors and psychotherapists in practice-based research. In addition to drawing from dissertations already in the public domain students and graduates from the doctoral programme were invited to contribute their own embodied experiences from ‘doing’ a data analysis. The paper suggests a hybrid for narrative analysis, discussing the options to (re-)present narratives guided by a combined interest into the unique, personal whilst also looking for ‘themes’ within and across these narratives

The importance of diversity and inclusion within the research supervision relationship: The views of research students and supervisors

AbstractIntroductionResearch supervisors are uniquely positioned to recognise student abilities and needs. This mixed methods study explores how research supervision can support counselling, psychotherapy and counselling psychology doctoral students in their development of new knowledge, with diversity‐related opportunities and challenges in mind.MethodsGuided by ‘dialectical pragmatism’, we used a semi‐qualitative online survey, Reflective Online Practitioner Survey (ROPS; McBeath, 2020), with closed and open questions disseminated across learning institutes in the UK, Europe and North America.ResultsThe survey received 105 responses, with 45 coming from research supervisors and 60 from research students. Only a minority considered their own research supervision team to be diverse, and two‐thirds of respondents did not see matters relating to diversity and inclusion receiving sufficient emphasis in published research.ConclusionsBoth our quantitative and qualitative data addressed unequal representations in terms of gender and sexuality, ethnicity and heritage, (dis‐)ability and social class—several referring to a ‘history of domination by white, cis, non‐disabled male perspectives’. Many described ‘diversity being left out of research’ with consequences on the capacity to meet clients' need in clinical practice. As one said: ‘we need to decolonise the training material by critically analysing and situating knowledge and calling out missing voices’. Another stated: ‘If the research we conduct and draw on as practitioners cannot actively reckon with oppression within…we risk furthering the violence that marginalised clients, practitioners, and researchers face’. Support and training of supervisors to address diversity and power in research from the start of supervision were argued as essential, with both the supervisory relationship and innovative epistemological angles to knowledge and ‘reality’ in the field of mental health in mind