Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38025480›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2023

Differentiating authentic versus pseudo vulnerability in therapeutic practice.

Susan G Simpson, Limor Navot

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 28% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Susan G Simpson *UniSA Justice & Society, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Limor Navot *SafePath Institute, Epen, Netherlands.
U-center · NLUniversity of South Australia · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The importance of empathy and attuned care as key ingredients in therapeutic healing has been widely recognized. However, empathy that is delivered in ways that are misaligned with the client's clinical presentation and emotional states or 'modes' can have the opposite effect, reinforcing unhelpful coping patterns, and hindering recovery. In this theoretical development paper, it is proposed that 'pseudo vulnerability' is an important yet overlooked source of therapeutic impasses, often resulting in unremitting clinical problems, and poor clinical outcomes. A range of commonly occurring pseudo vulnerable presentations are described, including Complaining Protector, Attention/Recognition Seeking, and Self-Pity/Victim, with the addition of a new mode Helpless Surrenderer. Guidance on differentiating pseudo vulnerable modes from each other and from the authentic Vulnerable Child mode are delineated via characteristic clinical presentations and typical therapist countertransference reactions. Methods for managing pseudo vulnerability to facilitate access to underlying authentic vulnerability are described.

Indexed as

authenticityComplaining Protector modeHelpless Surrenderer modepseudo vulnerabilityschema modesSchema TherapySelf-Pity/Victim mode

Identifiers

PMID38025480
PMCPMC10643190
OpenAlexW4388023685

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.