Talk:Method of levels

Evaluation

I removed the "Testing" section because the same citation issue remains that I already mentioned in a previous edit summary (namely that citing an entire book is insufficient to verify the claim—specific page numbers are needed), but also because the single sentence in this section is not nearly specific enough to explain this subject. When and by whom has MOL been evaluated, and how has it been evaluated? This last question, how, is especially pertinent since the creators of MOL have written in the last couple of years about their discontent with psychotherapy evaluation, for example:

• Carey, Timothy A.; Stiles, William B. (January 2016). "Some problems with randomized controlled trials and some viable alternatives". Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy. 23 (1): 87–95. doi:10.1002/cpp.1942. PMID 25601435. {{cite journal}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
• Carey, Timothy A.; Tai, Sara J.; Mansell, Warren; Huddy, Vyv; Griffiths, Robert; Marken, Richard S. (June 2017). "Improving professional psychological practice through an increased repertoire of research methodologies: illustrated by the development of MOL". Professional Psychology: Research and Practice. 48 (3): 175–182. doi:10.1037/pro0000132. {{cite journal}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
• Donald, Ian N.; Carey, Timothy A. (October 2017). "Improving knowledge about the effectiveness of psychotherapy". Psychotherapy and Politics International. 15 (3): e1424. doi:10.1002/ppi.1424. {{cite journal}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)CS1 maint: article number as page number (link)

Please discuss here how to create an informative section on the subject of evaluation of MOL. Biogeographist (talk) 01:09, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Association with CBT is misleading

The title of the book A Transdiagnostic Approach to CBT using Method of Levels Therapy was the source of the suggestion that MOL is in the CBT family of therapies. This suggestion was introduced by @Biogeographist: on 28 September 2018. This is understandble and seems correct and reasonable on the face of it. However, the text of the book, and even the text of the book description on the publisher's website, demonstrates that this is inaccurate, sharply contrasting MOL with CBT, in which "Each different problem [i.e. diagnostic category] is usually treated by a different model of CBT." The series editor for the "CBT Distinctive Features" series must have been rather compelled to that choice of title. I have put a more balanced statement in the second paragraph of the Theory section.

Bn (talk) 04:04, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

MOL missing from Bill Powers article?

Wondering why the Bill Powers article makes no mention of his being the origin of this concept? -- Dough34 (talk) 21:35, 15 May 2026 (UTC)