A. PITTERMANN ET AL. 47
of only two instruments being used in the psychological test
examination within the unique circumstance of couples therapy
within the framework of a systemic therapy institute, psycho-
logical assessment can indeed have a very positive influence on
the therapeutic process. A further positive aspect of psycho-
logical assessment is apparent in that an assessment done be-
fore the first session can lead to a couple appearing for therapy
despite a long waiting period. It must be noted that there is no
data about how many couples without assessment dropped out
during the waiting period, as it is exclusively the couples who
appeared for their first interview appointment in the group
without assessment who appear in the statistics. At this point
therefore it can only be observed, without being supported by
figures, that the number of couples that did not appear for their
first interview after assessment was carried out was an order of
magnitude smaller than that of the couples in the group without
an assessment appointment. It seems possible that either this
difference can be explained by the couples having already “in-
vested” in the assessment and wanting to justify having gone to
this trouble and they therefore appear for their first interview to
find out the results of the assessment, or it could be that the
assessment carried out during the waiting period conveyed the
impression to the couples that real interest was being shown in
their problems and in this way a stable commitment to the
therapy institute was established. The fact that there is no dif-
ference between the groups in the breaking off or ending of
therapy indicates that the couples who appeared for therapy,
irrespective of whether testing has previously been carried out
or not, were genuinely interested in undertaking therapy.
In order to answer the question of what use psychological as-
sessment has for clients and therapists at the end of the day, the
subjective evaluation of the relevance of psychological assess-
ment was investigated from a clients’ and therapists’ point of
view. The final evaluation questionnaire filled out by the trial
group included the opportunity to give an open answer to the
question, “I found the questionnaire examination to be help-
ful/not helpful, because:” While the clients were sparing with
their criticism, and only in one or two cases said that the test
results were not of enough significance or already known, the
therapists took issue with numerous difficulties with psycho-
logical assessment. The criticism included the statements that
psychological assessment was too superficial, irrelevant to the
therapeutic process, would cement hypotheses, and that the
results were in stark contrast to the problems claimed. Not one
therapist gave a positive evaluation of psychological assess-
ment. The clients, on the other hand, presented a great many
arguments in support of psychological testing. The clients indi-
cated that they found the questionnaire examination to be help-
ful since it gave them an overview of the necessity of formulat-
ing their difficulties and general problems, concretized the “ini-
tial conditions” of the problems, provoked contemplation of
and engagement with their image of themselves and how others
saw them, and in this way allowed the development of a new
understanding of the problem. The clients noted that in addition
to this they had gained new perspectives on their problems, but
also the things they had in common had become clearer and
avenues to discussion between the partners had opened up. It is
certainly necessary and desirable that further investigation,
using various different control studies and different test tech-
niques, is carried out in order to identify the optimal ways of
implementing psychological assessment within the therapeutic
process for the future. This first study regarding the possibility,
not simply of the coexistence, but the actual alliance of psy-
chological assessment and psychotherapy has clearly shown
that this course of action is worth pursuing.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the head of the Institute für
Ehe-und Familientherapie, Dr. Joachim Hinsch, and his team
who made this study possible.
References
Austrian Psychotherapy Act. http://www.psyonline.at
Beckmann, D., Brähler, E., & Richter, H. E. (1983). Der Gießen-test,
(3rd Edition). Bern: Verlag Hans Huber.
Benninghoven, D., Cierpka, M., & Thomas, V (2003). Überblick über
familiendiagnostische fragenbogeninventare. In: M. Cierpka (Ed.),
Handbuch der Familiendiagnostik (pp. 487-510). Berlin: S pringer.
Braun, U., & Regli, G. (2000). Psychotherapie-evaluation in der praxis.
In: A. R. Laireiter (Ed.), Diagnostik in der Psychotherapie (pp. 459-
475). Vienna: Springer.
Brähler, E., & Brähler, C. (1997). Paardiagnostik mit dem Gießen-test.
Bern: Verlag Hans Huber.
Cierpka, M. (2000). Diagnostik in der familientherapie. In: A. R.
Laireiter (Ed.), Diagnostik in der psychotherapie (pp. 217-234).
Vienna: Springer.
Cierpka, M. (2003). Handbuch der familiendiagnostik. Berlin: Springer.
Cierpka, M., & Frevert, G. (1994). Die Familienbögen. Göttingen:
Hogrefe.
Fiegl, J., & Reznicek, E. (2000). Diagnostik in der systemischen
therapie. In: A. R. Laireiter (Ed.), Diagnostik in der psychotherapie
(pp. 235-245). Vienna: Spr i nge r.
Gehring, T. M. ( 1998). Familiensystemtest. Weinheim: Beltz.
Howells, J. G., & Lickorish, J. R. (1989). Familien-Beziehungs-test (4th
Edition). Munich: Reinhard.
Kos, M., & Biermann, G. (2002). Die verzauberte familie (5th Edition).
Göttingen: Hogrefe, Göttingen.
Kubinger, K. D. (2006). Psychologische diagnostik - theorie und praxis
psychologischen diagnosti zie ren. Göttingen: Hogrefe.
Kubinger, K. D. (2007). Belastendes partnerwahlmuster oder versagter
partnerwunsch: Rehabilitationsansätze durch den fragebogen zu
angebot und nachfrage in partnerschaften. In B. Ahrbeck & E. V.
Kardoff (Eds.), Die fragile dynamik der psyche als risiko und chance
in der rehabilitation (pp. 38-49). Achen: Shaker.
Kubinger, K. D., Alexandro w i cz, R., Punter, J. F., &. Brähle r, E. (2003).
Paardiagnostik mit dem Gießen-test-typische paarprofile in der
“normal”-bevölkerung. Familendynamik, 28,. 219-235.
Kubinger, K. D., & Jäger, R. S. (2003). Schlüsselbegriffe der Psy-
chologischen Diagnostik. Wei nheim: Beltz PVU.
Laireiter, A. R. (2000a). Diagnostik in der psychotherapie. Vienna:
Springer.
Laireiter, A. R. (2000b). Diagnostik, dokumentation und qualitä-
tssicherung von Psychotherapie. In: Laireiter, A. R. (Ed.), Diagnostik
in der psychotherapie (p p. 441-458). Vienna: Springer .
Laireiter, A. R. (2000c). Diagnostik in der psychotherapie: perspe-
ktiven, aufgaben und qualitätskriterien. In: A. R. Laireiter (Ed.),
Diagnostik in der psychotherapie (pp. 3-23). Vienna: Springer-
Verlag.
Laireiter, A. R. (2005). Klinisch-psychologische und psychothera-
peutische diagnostik. In: H. Bartuska et al. (Eds.), Psychothera-
peutische diagnostik (pp. 199-226). Vienna: Spr i n ger.
doi:10.1007/3-211-29398-1_25
Ludewig, K. (2005). Einführung in die theoretischen grundlagen der
systemischen therapie. Heidelberg: Carl-Auer-Systeme Verlag.