Abstract
Abstract This chapter outlines the evidence base for the use of paradoxical interventions (PIs) in individual psychotherapy. Often misunderstood, PIs have shown long-term (distal) impacts on clinical outcomes. Definitions of PIs and their constituent elements (double-binds, reframing, circular causality) are presented along with clinical examples. The chapter reports on one meta-analysis comparing PIs with a placebo or control and another comparing PIs to other therapeutic methods. Paradoxes demonstrated a large effect (d = 1.1, k = 17 studies) compared to controls and a medium effect size (d = 0.49, k = 17 studies) compared to other therapeutic methods. The chapter concludes with diversity considerations, training recommendations, and therapeutic practices.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
