| Abstract: | In this article I review the psychotherapy outcomes literature as it pertains to the Dodo hypothesis. This is the proposition that the effects of psychotherapy are due to common factors rather than specific techniques. A variety of sources provide substantial empirical support for the Dodo hypothesis. I conclude that CBT and medication do not appear to be any better than other methodologies for the treatment of psychological distress. I look at some of the criticisms of the Dodo hypothesis. I suggest that the major themes that emerge from the literature as it stands are conclusions that would be immediately obvious to most clinicians. Further, the utility of specific techniques has not been ruled out, due to some serious conceptual flaws in efficacy trials. I suggest that there are a number of ways for family therapists to survive in an evidence‐based world. One is to point out to champions of evidence‐based practice just how flimsy their claims are. Another would be to advocate for pluralism and to practise and conduct research under the aegis of a contextual philosophy. |
