Beyebach, Mark
Loading...
Email Address
person.page.identifierURI
Birth Date
Job Title
Last Name
Beyebach
First Name
Mark
person.page.departamento
Ciencias de la Salud
person.page.instituteName
ORCID
person.page.observainves
person.page.upna
Name
- Publications
- item.page.relationships.isAdvisorOfPublication
- item.page.relationships.isAdvisorTFEOfPublication
- item.page.relationships.isAuthorMDOfPublication
2 results
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Publication Open Access The global outcomes of solution-focused brief therapy: a revision(Taylor & Francis, 2022) Neipp López, María del Carmen; Beyebach, Mark; Ciencias de la Salud; Osasun Zientziak; Universidad Pública de Navarra / Nafarroako Unibertsitate PublikoaSolution-focused Brief Therapy (SFBT) has generated outcome research worldwide and in a variety of intervention contexts. A systematic literature search yielded 251 published outcome studies on SFBT. SFBT was found superior to control groups or at post-test in almost nine out of every ten studies. Taking only 91 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) into account, SFBT was still found superior in seven out of every ten. Results varied slightly according to intervention type and format, manualization, and components of SFBT. They also varied more according to type of comparator and use of diagnostic criteria. These results widen the evidence base for SFBT.Publication Open Access Solution-focused versus problem-focused questions: differential effects of miracles, exceptions and scales(Wiley, 2021) Neipp López, María del Carmen; Beyebach, Mark; Sánchez Prada, Andrés; Delgado Álvarez, María del Carmen; Ciencias de la Salud; Osasun ZientziakThe differential impact of solution-focused brief therapy questions was tested. A total of 246 subjects described a personal problem they wanted to solve and were randomly assigned to one of four interventions that involved answering problem-focused versus solution-focused questions: a problem-focused condition, a miracle condition, a scaling condition or an exception condition. Before and after answering the questions, participants completed measures of positive and negative affect, self-efficacy, goal attainment, action steps and solution-focused thinking. The miracle and exception conditions were more effective than the problem-focused condition in reducing negative affect. The scaling condition generated more action steps than the miracle question or the exception question. These findings support solution-focused ideas on the different effects of solution-focused questions, but also suggest that solution-focused and problem-focused questions might be more similar than different in their immediate impact on clients. Practitioner points: Solution-focused and problem-focused questions are more similar than different in their immediate impact on clients. Among solution-focused questions, the miracle question and the exception question are more effective in reducing negative affect, and scaling questions in generating specific action steps. Integrative therapists could use solution-focused questions not only with clients who seem more optimistic but also with less solution-minded ones.