632 APPENDICES of the intervention process, an analysis was made of the movement features visible in a video clip. The analysis of the interaction between the client and the therapist served as the pre- or baseline measurement. Subsequently, the research aligned with the “natural” process of intervention. This means that the video recordings made to monitor and adjust the intervention were also used for time-series analyses. The video recordings of each case were analysed based on availability and usefulness. To test the hypotheses, time series variables were examined by applying several analysis techniques. The main one was Cross Recurrence Quantification Analysis (Webber & Zbilut, 2005). In addition, Linell’s Initiative Response method for analysing interactive dominance between two conversation partners was used in three cases (Linell et al., 1988). Furthermore, self-report measures such as questionnaires and interviews were used in two cases. In four cases, gaze direction of the therapist and client was used as the input for time series variables. In one case, reciprocal trunk movements were measured using a WII-balance board, and in one case, the time series consisted of periods of speaking and silence from the therapist and client. Additionally, in six cases, Motion Energy Analysis (MEA) was applied (Ramseyer & Tschacher, 2011). Finally, in three cases, Initiative Response (IR) variables (IR coefficients and difference scores) were measured (Linell et al., 1988). The description of the treatment process was the same in all cases. Each case began with a problem statement, which outlines the family situation of the client, provides a DSM diagnosis, and presents a description of the behaviour. Following this, a brief description of the expertise and background of the therapist was presented as well as an analysis of the interaction between the therapist and the client, and an interpretation of the description using Movement-as-anchor. From this, a treatment plan was developed, detailing how the therapist is encouraged to behave differently in their contact with the client. In the section on influencing movement, specific movement features that the therapist should focus on were identified. After the intervention had taken place, a behavioural analysis, based on our method Movement-as-anchor was conducted again. Following this, quantitative results based on CRQA and/or MEA were presented, followed by possible qualitative findings. The discussion sections commented on and provided theoretical interpretations of the results. Results We provide a brief overview of all ten cases and their corresponding issues. As said, the approach used involved modifying the therapist’s movement features to elicit or further develop compliance and initiative, to establish reciprocity. When the structure of reciprocity is developed and recognized in relation to a therapist, it is expected that the client will also be able to apply it to other relationships.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw