Shaw2020
| Shaw2020 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Shaw2020 |
| Author(s) | Chloe Shaw, Chris Lo, Anne Lanceley, Sarah Hales, Gary Rodin |
| Title | The Assessment of Mentalization: Measures for the Patient, the Therapist and the Interaction |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2020 |
| Language | English |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Journal of Contemporary Psychotherapy |
| Volume | 50 |
| Number | 1 |
| Pages | 57–65 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1007/s10879-019-09420-z |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
Mentalization has been clearly defined in the literature as a relational concept and yet in surveys and transcript-based measures it is almost universally treated as an individual capacity. That approach has value but may not capture the emergent nature of mentalization, as it is jointly constructed within a relational context. We report here on a critical evaluation of measurement approaches commonly used to conceptualize and assess mentalization and argue for the value of conversation analysis (CA) as an alternative approach. A variety of approaches have been shown to have utility in assessing mentalization as an individual capacity. We illustrate how conversation analysis allows for an in-depth-analysis of mentalization as it is co-created across different contexts in real-life therapy sessions. This method of analysis shifts the focus from content to process. Conversation analysis is a potentially valuable tool to support training, to assess treatment integrity, and to improve outcomes with mentalization-based interventions.
Notes
