Reconciling humanistic ideals and scientific clinical practice

A rift currently exists between two camps in clinical psychology: mental health practitioners, who resonate to concepts such as self-actualization and personal growth, and research scientists, who often shun such concepts as overly value-laden or as empirically indefensible. In the present article we first suggest that this gap is bridged by self-determination theory (SDT), which incorporates aspects of humanistic theories and also stands up to rigorous scientific investigation (Deci & Ryan, 1985, 2000). We then demonstrate how self-determination principles may be applied in the context of empirically supported medical and clinical treatments, to promote enhanced client motivation and treatment compliance. We conclude that scientifically supported treatments and the humanistic tenets of SDT actually facilitate one another, such that clinicians who ignore either of the two aspects may shortchange their clients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]Copyright of Clinical Psychology: Science & Practice is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)