Raccolta degli articoli scientifici e ricerche nel campo della Control-Mastery Theory.
This article aims to highlight how chronic couple conflictuality can be read from the control-mastery theory perspective. Some empirically grounded couple conflictuality models are reviewed and discussed, particularly regarding researchers’ tendency to focus on specific ways of dealing with conflicts, and the presence of a specific relational pattern, the demand/withdraw style, which seems to be particularly present among high-conflict couples. The article further presents an overview of the psychodynamic and systemic literature on couple conflictuality, in which three basic ways of reading conflict emerge: as an outcome of projective identification mechanisms; as a consequence of deficits in mentalization and affective regulation; and as a breakdown of dysfunctional communication strategies. The main control-mastery theory concepts also are presented, with a particular focus on its application to couple conflicts. According to this perspective, chronic couple conflictuality results from the repetition of vicious relational circles—that is, mutually failed tests by partners that give rise to negative escalations and couple dissatisfaction. A sample of clinical material from couple therapy is presented to exemplify this idea.
The aim of this paper is to empirically assess the reliability of the plan formulation method for couples, a procedure for formulating the case, planning, and monitoring the couple therapies according to control-mastery theory. We hypothesized that when couples are looking for couple therapy, they have an unconscious couple’s plan for the therapy, which includes the couple’s goals; the pathogenic beliefs that the partners want to disprove; the traumas from which these beliefs originated and that the partners want to master; the vicious relational circles that make the couple suffer and that the couple wants to break; the virtuous relational circles that are expressions of the couple’s resources and that the couple wants to fuel; and the relational insights that may help the couple get better. Our study involved 15 couples treated by four experienced therapists. Four raters independently formulated each couple’s plan based on the first three sessions following a standard procedure, and we calculated the intraclass correlation for pooled judges’ ratings. For a subsample of three couples—who before and after treatment had completed the dyadic adjustment scale (DAS) and the outcome questionnaire-45.2 (OQ-45.2)—the compatibility of the therapists’ interventions with the couples’ and partners’ plans was assessed. The relationship between the ratings of compatibility, DAS and OQ-45.2, was assessed. The results showed excellent interjudge reliability for each couple’s plan formulation (average ICC=0.82), attesting to the validity of the procedure; and preliminary data on the therapeutic process suggested that therapists’ interventions compatible with couple’s plans could help partners achieve good outcomes.
This article proposes an adaptation to couple therapy of the Plan Formulation Method, an empirically validated and clinically useful assessment procedure for planning case-specific psychotherapy interventions. According to Control-Mastery Theory (CMT), individuals who seek psychotherapy have an unconscious plan, which comprises goals, obstructions, tests, traumas, and insights. The Plan Formulation Method was developed to reliably formulate individual psychotherapy cases. To apply this method to couples therapy, we have added two components: dysfunctional relationship patterns (vicious relational circles) and resources (virtuous relational circles). Each component will be explained with the help of a clinical case. We discuss the implication of the use of the Plan Formulation Method for couples and compare some of the tenets of CMT applied to couples with the main approaches to couple therapy.
This article introduces the Interpersonal Guilt Rating Scale-15 (IGRS- 15), a brief clinician-rated tool for the clinical assessment of interpersonal guilt as conceived in Control-Mastery Theory (CMT; Silberschatz, 2015; Weiss, 1993), and its psychometric proprieties. The items of the IGRS-15 were derived from the CMT clinical and empirical literature about guilt, and from the authors’ clinical experiences. Twenty-eight clinicians assessed 154 patients with the IGRS-15, the patient self-reported Interpersonal Guilt Questionnaire-67 (IGQ- 67; O’Connor, Berry, Weiss, Bush, & Sampson, 1997), and the Clinical Data Form (CDF; Westen & Shedler, 1999). A semi-exploratory factor analysis pointed to a four-factor solution in line with the kinds of guilt described in CMT: Survivor guilt, Separation/disloyalty guilt, Omnipotent responsibility guilt, and Self-hate. The test-retest reliability of the IGRS-15 was good. Moreover, the IGRS-15 showed good concurrent and discriminant validity with the IGQ-67. IGRS-15 represents a first step in the direction of supporting the clinical judg- ment about interpersonal guilt with an empirically sound and easy-to-use tool.
