Adlerian Therapy Vs SFBT

Introduction

The purpose of this paper is to compare and contrast three psychotherapeutic models, namely, Adlerian Therapy (AT), Aaron Beck’s Cognitive Therapy (CT) and Solution Focused Brief Therapy (SFBT). The paper covers the similarities and differences of the underlying assumptions and the key concepts of the theories. Next, their therapeutic goals and relationships are explored. Lastly, the techniques and procedures of the therapies are discussed. The conclusion provides an overall summary of the major themes in this paper.

Basic assumptions and key concepts

The AT, CBT and SFBT are dynamic approaches. They hold different assumptions about the origins of human suffering. AT focuses on what Adler called the “inferiority complex”, whereby

While CT techniques are known for its reliance on empirically based treatment and structured, SFBT rejects ideas of adhering to a structured and evidence-based treatment. Instead, it postulates that, client’s play a central told in determining the course of the therapeutic process (Corey, 2013,p.370). AT and CT observes techniques such homework assignment that includes tasks such as thought log (Sharf, R. 2012 p.142, 382). Although SFBT may not explicitly task clients to perform such activities, it still asks clients to note any difference or changes between the current session and next, this is known as ‘formula first session task (FFST)’. (Sharf, R. 2012, p. 459). When reflecting upon these, the purpose of the homework task and FFST is to look for exceptions and eventually

This is backed by (Sharf 2010, p.457, cited Rothwell, 2005) where it was found that SFBT took two therapy sessions to completion on average and five therapy sessions for CBT. AT typically requires more therapy sessions probably because of its heavy emphasis on the social environment and much time is spent obtaining information on this (Corey, 2013, ref). Further more, Freeman et.al., (1997) cited Ansbacher &Ansbacher, 1964, p. 201 recommended that a typical session using AT approach would take approximately eight to ten weeks and said it would be ideal that clients are told the following ‘Let us begin. In a month I shall ask you whether we are on the right track if not, we shall break it off’. Contrary to this was what Ansbacher (1989) (as cited by Sharf, p.149, 2010) presented. He stated that the length of therapy sessions was determined by ‘the reasoning behind the symptoms’. In short, Adlerians preferred to have brief sessions with clients, similar to