Competing Visions of the Implications of Neuroscience for Psychotherapy

Abstract

In this third and final article of a series on the confluence of neurobiology and psychotherapy, we consider three current, influential interpretations of the implications of neuroscience for psychotherapy: pharmacological treatment, reparative attachment therapy, and the cognitive regulation of emotion and behavior. We critically examine these clinical strategies, reviewing efficacy data, neuroscientific research, and the model of symptom production by coherent implicit memory as articulated in coherence psychology. We argue that according to current knowledge, (a) each of the three clinical interpretations of neuroscience implements only part of the brain's known capabilities for change; (b) those capabilities are more fully utilized and can yield greater clinical effectiveness for the majority of psychotherapy clients through a therapeutic strategy of selective depotentiation of implicit memory, as exemplified by coherence therapy; and (c) the strategy of counteracting an implicit memory, whether cognitively or psychopharmacologically, is only moderately effective, is inherently susceptible to relapse, and entails a range of undesirable collateral effects.