A new meta-meta-analysis in Clinical Psychology Review entitled, Researcher Alliance in Psychotherapy Outcome Research: An Overview of Reviews, by Munder, Brutsch, Leonhart, Gerger, and Barth (in press) addresses the problem of researcher allegiance in increasing risk of bias in psychotherapy outcome research. The analysis included 30 meta-analyses of a variety of psychotherapies. The authors report a moderate effect size suggesting a rather robust research allegiance-to-outcome relationship. They discuss ways of minimizing research allegiance bias in comparative studies of psychotherapy models.
We would like to hear your comments on this topic. Can we do a better job to prevent or minimize research allegiance bias in our work?