Validating the rapid responder construct within a practice research network

Samuel S. Nordberg, Louis G. Castonguay, Aaron J. Fisher, James F. Boswell, David Kraus

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

24 Scopus citations


Objective: The present study was a replication and extension of prior work (Stulz, Lutz, Leach, Lucock, & Barkham, ) that identified multiple groups of clients in treatment with high-symptom severity and markedly different recovery trajectories (rapid/early response vs. little or no response). Method: Using data collected through repeated administrations of the Depression subscale of the Treatment Outcome Package (n = 147), growth mixture modeling was employed to determine whether clients fell into discrete groups of response trajectories during 15 sessions of psychotherapy. Additionally, logistic regressions were conducted to assess possible predictors of group membership. Results: Three separate groups of treatment responders were identified: 2 high-symptom groups-rapid responders and nonresponders-and 1 low-symptom group of nonresponders. Elevated social conflict and suicidality predicted increased likelihood of membership in the high-symptom nonresponder group. Increased feelings of interpersonal hostility and better sexual functioning predicted increased likelihood of membership in the rapid responder group. Conclusion: Replication of earlier results provides further evidence for the usefulness of modeling change during psychotherapy using multiple trajectories. Predictors of group membership indicate the influence of functional impairment on recovery, and support the importance of multidimensional measurement of client problems.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)886-903
Number of pages18
JournalJournal of clinical psychology
Issue number9
StatePublished - Sep 2014

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)
  • Clinical Psychology


Dive into the research topics of 'Validating the rapid responder construct within a practice research network'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this