A systematic review of patient-therapist synchrony as an indicator of emotion regulation in psychotherapy: an integrated approach.

IF 2.3 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Federica Ameli, Federico Abbarchi Minucci, Ludovica Zanini, Gioele Calmi, Grazia Fernanda Spitoni
{"title":"A systematic review of patient-therapist synchrony as an indicator of emotion regulation in psychotherapy: an integrated approach.","authors":"Federica Ameli, Federico Abbarchi Minucci, Ludovica Zanini, Gioele Calmi, Grazia Fernanda Spitoni","doi":"10.4081/ripppo.2025.866","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Interpersonal synchrony is increasingly being studied in the context of psychotherapy. The Interpersonal Synchrony (In-Sync) model proposes that patient-therapist synchrony enhances working alliance by promoting emotion regulation (ER). While the link between synchrony and working alliance has been extensively described, its relation to ER in the clinical setting remains underexplored. The present systematic review, therefore, aimed to address this gap by providing a qualitative synthesis of the methods employed and the results reported by studies investigating the relationship between patient-therapist synchrony and ER. A comprehensive search yielded seven studies (out of an initial 2,094), published between 2007 and 2024, encompassing 828 participants (563 patients and 265 therapists). Despite finding highly heterogeneous conceptual frameworks and methodologies employed to assess both synchrony (e.g., motion energy analysis [MEA], electrocardiogram, skin conductance) and ER (e.g., self-report questionnaires and behavioral coding systems), the studies' results revealed a predominantly positive association between synchrony and ER, with in-phase synchrony linked to improved emotional stability and positive emotional experiences. Nonetheless, two studies presented contrasting results, either suggesting a more complex dynamic of co-regulation or finding no direct relationship between nonverbal synchrony and emotional self-regulation. Additionally, a notable research gap was revealed regarding older adults, as no studies included participants over 61 years. Overall, this systematic review highlights the lack of standardized methods and conceptual ambiguity surrounding ER, ultimately limiting cross-study comparability, as well as emphasizing the multiple roles of synchrony in psychotherapy and the need for further research to establish methodological coherence and theoretical consensus in this field.</p>","PeriodicalId":44262,"journal":{"name":"Research in Psychotherapy-Psychopathology Process and Outcome","volume":"28 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research in Psychotherapy-Psychopathology Process and Outcome","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4081/ripppo.2025.866","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Interpersonal synchrony is increasingly being studied in the context of psychotherapy. The Interpersonal Synchrony (In-Sync) model proposes that patient-therapist synchrony enhances working alliance by promoting emotion regulation (ER). While the link between synchrony and working alliance has been extensively described, its relation to ER in the clinical setting remains underexplored. The present systematic review, therefore, aimed to address this gap by providing a qualitative synthesis of the methods employed and the results reported by studies investigating the relationship between patient-therapist synchrony and ER. A comprehensive search yielded seven studies (out of an initial 2,094), published between 2007 and 2024, encompassing 828 participants (563 patients and 265 therapists). Despite finding highly heterogeneous conceptual frameworks and methodologies employed to assess both synchrony (e.g., motion energy analysis [MEA], electrocardiogram, skin conductance) and ER (e.g., self-report questionnaires and behavioral coding systems), the studies' results revealed a predominantly positive association between synchrony and ER, with in-phase synchrony linked to improved emotional stability and positive emotional experiences. Nonetheless, two studies presented contrasting results, either suggesting a more complex dynamic of co-regulation or finding no direct relationship between nonverbal synchrony and emotional self-regulation. Additionally, a notable research gap was revealed regarding older adults, as no studies included participants over 61 years. Overall, this systematic review highlights the lack of standardized methods and conceptual ambiguity surrounding ER, ultimately limiting cross-study comparability, as well as emphasizing the multiple roles of synchrony in psychotherapy and the need for further research to establish methodological coherence and theoretical consensus in this field.

病人-治疗师同步性作为心理治疗中情绪调节指标的系统回顾:一种综合方法。
人际同步性在心理治疗领域的研究越来越多。人际同步(In-Sync)模型认为,患者-治疗师同步通过促进情绪调节(ER)来增强工作联盟。虽然同步和工作联盟之间的联系已被广泛描述,但其与临床环境中的ER的关系仍未得到充分探讨。因此,本系统综述旨在通过对所采用的方法和研究报告的结果进行定性综合来解决这一差距,这些研究调查了患者-治疗师同步与ER之间的关系。一项全面的搜索得出了2007年至2024年间发表的7项研究(来自最初的2094项研究),涉及828名参与者(563名患者和265名治疗师)。尽管发现了用于评估同步性(例如,运动能量分析[MEA]、心电图、皮肤电导)和内质网(例如,自我报告问卷和行为编码系统)的高度异构的概念框架和方法,但研究结果显示,同步性和内质网之间存在显著的正相关,同相同步与改善情绪稳定性和积极情绪体验有关。然而,两项研究给出了截然不同的结果,要么表明了共同调节的更复杂的动态,要么发现非语言同步和情绪自我调节之间没有直接关系。此外,关于老年人的研究存在显著差距,因为没有研究包括61岁以上的参与者。总的来说,这篇系统综述强调了急诊室缺乏标准化的方法和概念上的模糊性,最终限制了交叉研究的可比性,并强调了同步性在心理治疗中的多重作用,以及在该领域建立方法一致性和理论共识的进一步研究的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
18.50%
发文量
28
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信