With today’s article we want to delve deeper into what are considered the criticisms and objections to the use and effectiveness of Single Session Therapy as a methodology in the psychological field.
What are the main criticisms leveled at SST?
The doubts that SST raises are various, especially among those in the field. We can summarize them in questions and answers .
How is it possible to perform a successful intervention in just one session?
This is the most common observation . One wonders how a change can occur in such a limited time .
Simply put: research has clearly shown that change can occur in a very limited time, such as that of a session, taking inspiration from changes that occur outside of therapy. In fact, people are able to face and solve countless problems every day, without resorting to therapy, and they do so in a short time . Only when they cannot do it independently do they seek psychological help.
Furthermore, SST focuses on getting the most out of every single meeting , although not necessarily just one meeting. This means that a focus on the client’s goals and resources, in a “context of expertise” allows for an effective meeting (Hoyt, Talmon, 2018), when the client is ready. This is done by identifying with him the actions to be implemented and amplifying what he already does, useful for solving the problem.
Does SST only solve small problems?
It is common to think that to solve big problems, long and tiring therapy courses are needed, the longer the more rooted and “serious” the client’s situation is. What SST does, instead, is to start from the problem in its simplest declination and establish the objective of the single session.
Even with major issues, the difficulty of the problem is reduced to smaller, simpler components so that change can be triggered.
Are the results of a short intervention equally short?
There has been a lot of research on this subject and certainly much more is needed. What we know now is that the use of SST has proven to be useful and effective both when planned and not .
A study conducted by Talmon, Rosemnbaum and Hoyt (1988) showed that a very large percentage of those who had obtained a significant improvement from a single session had maintained the results at 3, 6 and 12 months. Subsequently other analyses have deepened the question reporting similar results. In the 2012 review by Campbell, for example, the results of the therapy are prolonged with follow-up up to three years.
In some cases, maintenance of the results at follow-up was possible without any recourse to therapy, while for others it was possible thanks to the use of one or two additional meetings.
Is this an intermittent therapy?
SST expects each meeting to be complete in itself and to provide the person with useful tools already at the end of the meeting so that, once out of the session, they can begin a process of change. It is possible that a single meeting is enough or that there is a need to see each other again, in agreement with the patient who is asked what he considers most useful for him.
The door always remains open. This means that at any time the person, even after a long time, can return to address the difficulty already known or something else. It is rather a “therapy on demand”.
Is this a new method?
Contrary to popular belief, Single Session Therapy has been used much earlier than one might think. The beginnings can be traced back to Freud who, due to force majeure, conducted some cases in a brief manner. Many other experts have used this methodology throughout their careers, albeit in an unstructured manner. It was then with the work of Talmon, Hoyt and Rosenbaum, in the 90s, that a first definition and the various subsequent evolutions were reached.
It is therefore a method not as new as many professionals themselves believe. Its development and success lies in being an intervention technique that integrates well with the various psychological schools of thought.
In conclusion
SST does not claim to be considered the best methodology in the psychological field. For its part, it has the possibility of establishing itself as a valid and effective method, proven by numerous studies. Furthermore, it fits into a context, the current one, in which more and more people are looking for immediate help, with a less demanding economic expenditure. Time and money are therefore saved to the advantage of psychological well-being.
Giada Mastrogregori
Psychologist
Bibliography
Hoyt, M.F., Talmon, M. (2018). Foreword to the book Single-Session Therapy: Principles and Practices . Giunti Editore.
Cannistrà, F., & Piccirilli, F. (2018). Single-Session Therapy: Principles and Practices . Giunti Editore.
Talmon M., Hoyt MF, Rosenbaum R. (1988). When the first session is the last: A map for rapid therapeutic change . Symposium presented at the Fourth International Congress on Ericksonian Approaches to Hypnosis and Psychotherapy, “Brief Therapy: Myths, Methods, and Metaphors,” San Francisco.
Campbell A. (2012), Single-session approaches to therapy: time to review . Australian and New Zealand Journal of Family Therapy.