Client cooperative interview behavior and outcome in paradoxical and behavioral brief treatment approaches.
In this study, we investigated the differential implications of client cooperation for improvement in behavioral versus paradoxical brief treatment approaches. The subjects included 16 clients who completed a brief course of counseling, 9 in a paradoxical condition and 7 in a behavioral condition. Client cooperation versus resistance was assessed on the basis of behavior during intake interviews in terms of the coordinating style construct (Westerman, Tanaka, Frankei, & Kahn, 1986), which assesses how well the client coordinates contributions to the interaction with the interviewer's contributions and the client's own contributions at other points in time. As hypothesized, there was a stronger negative relation between noncoordinating style and improvement in the behavioral condition as compared with the paradoxical condition. The findings provide preliminary empirical support for the widely held position that a paradoxical approach is especially well suited for resistant clients, whereas behavioral approaches are appropriate for cooperative clients. There is now considerable interest in determining how to most effectively match clients and counseling approaches. One claim about matching has been put forward quite widely. According to this position, a paradoxical approach is the treatment of choice for difficult, resistant clients, whereas behavioral approaches are well suited for cooperative clients. This view has been advanced by proponents of both treatment approaches. In recent years, behavior therapists have recognized that client resistance plays a significant negative role in the outcome of behavioral treatment approaches (Goldfried, 1982; Patterson, 1984). They have argued that it is necessary to use special techniques when clients do not engage in the treatment process in an active, cooperative manner. The suggestion that paradoxical interventions may