Prior to 2000, personal practice (PP) for therapists mostly meant personal therapy. Recently a new landscape of PPs has emerged, with meditation-based programs and therapy self-practice/self-reflection (SP/SR) programs playing an increasing role in training and personal/professional development. The challenge now for practitioners and researchers is to refocus on the role of PPs in training and professional development. Are PPs of value - or not? Do they have a role in therapist development? How might PPs enhance therapist skilfulness? Do different PPs act in similar or different ways? Currently, the PP literature lacks a theoretical framework to guide practitioners in their choice of PPs or researchers in their choice of research questions and measures. The purpose of this article is to provide such a framework, the Personal Practice (PP) model. The PP model proposes primary impacts of PPs in four domains: personal development/wellbeing, self-awareness, interpersonal beliefs/attitudes/skills and reflective skills. The model also suggests a secondary impact on therapists' conceptual/technical skills when therapists use reflection to consider the implications of their PP for their "therapist self". We offer some suggestions to enhance the quality of future research, and conclude that PPs may play an important and perhaps unique role in therapist training.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 March 2018.
All research outputs
#22,381,111
of 32,627,830 outputs
Outputs from Cognitive Behaviour Therapy
#365
of 500 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#233,791
of 361,621 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cognitive Behaviour Therapy
#3
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,627,830 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 500 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 361,621 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.
