Controlled outcome research with paradoxical interventions: A review for clinicians.

Reviews paradoxical intervention (PI) research emphasizing the clinical, methodological, and qualitative aspects of the same studies in a review by K. A. Hill (see record 1988-01996-001). More than two-thirds of the outcome studies inspected were of questionable relevance to the clinician (e.g., undergraduates as Ss, atypical durations, overly restrictive field of disorders, and improper or inadequate follow-up). PI has thus not demonstrated its superiority over placebo or alternative treatments. Hill's strategy of using the average effect size per study as the unit of analysis may help to misrepresent the clinical facts in each study. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)