GESTALT THERAPY

PAST, PRESENT, THEORY, AND RESEARCH

MOORE, LAURA E. WAGNER

¹Department of Psychology, University of Massachusetts at Boston.

²Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Laura E., Wagner Moore, PhD, Center for Child and Family Health, Duke University Medical Center, 3518 Westgate Drive, Suite 100, Durham, NC, 27707. E-mail [email protected].

This article represents a modified paper written for a graduate school requirement at the University of Massachusetts at Boston. Assistance was provided by Joan Liem, Ester Shapiro, and Don Kalick, University of Massachusetts at Boston.

Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training 41(2):p 180-189, Summer 2004.

Orthodox gestalt therapy suffered a rather unfortunate fate; gestalt theory has been poorly articulated, and gestalt techniques have received minimal empirical validation. These weaknesses are, in part, a consequence of F. Perls's biographical history, which led to an integration of disparate theoretical models that were exacerbated by F. Perls's haphazard, idiosyncratic personal style. However, recent empirical research suggests that the 2-chair technique is superior to other therapeutic interventions for conflict splits, decisional conflict, marital conflict, and unfinished business and that the 2-chair technique is as effective as Rogerian and cognitive–behavioral therapies. Although F. Perls's techniques may have been generated largely from his idiosyncratic personality characteristics, these techniques have some validity for very specific psychological dilemmas.