Suchergebnisse

The article compares schema-therapy to narrative therapy across three domains: (i) theoretical methodological and philosophical framework; (ii) technics (both methods and their theoretical background), and (iii) mechanisms of change in therapy. Several ways of integrating these two therapies are proposed.
Schema therapy and narrative psychotherapy are based on contradicting methodologies of structuralism and post-structuralism. Schema therapy develops the concept of schemes, introduced by A. Beck, adding emotions, physiological reactions and memories to its structure, and stresses the importance of using emotion-focused techniques to change them. Narrative psychotherapy is based on theories of dialogical self, introduced by H. Hermans and narrative theories of identity, introduced by T. Sarbin and D. Bruner.
Both methods use the idea of multimodal structure of personality. Schema therapy partly uses the idea of distancing from and observing modes, introduced by the third wave of cognitive-behavioral therapies. Narrative psychotherapy uses externalization of symptoms as one of the core techniques.
Both methods modify the narrative of the person. Narrative psychotherapy seeks unique events to develop a new narrative of the person according to their values. Schema therapy uses imagery rescripting to meet the needs of a child mode and change emotions experienced in traumatic memory. Both therapies also use internalization of attachment figures.
Schema therapy can integrate metaphors from narrative therapy to deal with personality modes. It also can be enriched by treating these modes as sub personalities of narrative psychotherapy and focusing on their narratives and values.

The characteristics of the individual's time perspective in relation to changes in social, economic, and political conditions are of major conceptual interest. We assessed the time orientations of 1588 Ukrainian students living in two different regions (western and south-eastern Ukraine) with the Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory (ZTPI) before (2010–2013) and during (2014–2016) the socioeconomic, political, and military crises which started in 2014, eight years before the war in 2022. We applied ANOVAs with the ZTPI dimensions as dependent variables and the period of testing (precrisis, postcrisis) as an independent variable for the two Ukrainian regions separately. The time perspectives of residents in the region most distant from the war zone (western), who positively assessed the change in the political situation around 2014, increased in the future time orientation and decreased in the present-fatalistic, past-positive, and 333 present-hedonistic time orientations. The time perspectives of residents in the regions closest to the war zone (southeastern) decreased in the future and increased in the past-negative and present-fatalistic time orientations, reflecting their negative judgments of the events. It is not the crisis itself, but the specific social, economic, and political factors and evaluations which define the time perspectives, which are flexible and adjust to changes during extreme life circumstances.

Present behavior is influenced by its imaginary future consequences. However, it is known that the immediate and long-term consequences of the same behavior may have different effects on a person's well-being. Hence, when analyzing one's way of making decisions, it is important to take into account how far-reaching consequences of their behavior are considered. Among the variety of methods to measure future time perspective and its motivational impact on one's decisions and behavior, special attention should be paid to the Consideration of Future Consequences Scale (CFC), which consists of two sub-scales – immediate future and distant future. The scale allows to assess how far-reaching consequences of one's own actions are taken into consideration when making decisions and acting in the present moment. The first adaptation of the scale into Ukrainian language was conducted in 2017 (Senyk, Riznyk, Horbal), which resulted in good reliability and validity scores for both subscales. However, the question of the possibility of using the Ukrainian version of the CFC as a unidimensional scale remained open. The present article is dedicated to reviewing the validity and reliability of the Ukrainian CFC in its one- and two-factor solutions. The sample comprised of 1137 participants (M = 21.05), residents of almost all Ukrainian regions and the Autonomous Republic of Crimea. The results have shown that the Ukrainian version of CFC has good validity and reliability in both two- and one-factor solutions, and therefore is recommended to be used for future research and in the field of individual practice.