This article discusses the fundamental need for lived experience perspectives in developing and evaluating psychotherapies. The primary professional goal of clinical psychology is to serve individuals and communities living with or at risk of mental illness. To date, the field has fallen persistently short of this goal, despite decades of research on evidence-based treatments and myriad innovations in psychotherapy research. Brief and low-intensity programs, transdiagnostic approaches, and digital mental health tools have all challenged long-held assumptions of what "psychotherapy" can be, pointing toward novel pathways to effective care. And yet, population-level rates of mental illness are high and rising, access to care remains abysmally low, early treatment dropout among people who do access care is common, and science-backed treatments rarely make it into everyday practice. The author argues that the impact of psychotherapy innovations has been constrained by a fundamental flaw in clinical psychology's intervention development and evaluation pipeline. . From the start, intervention science has deprioritized the views and voices of those our treatments aim to support-from here, "experts by experience" (EBEs)-in the design, assessment, and dissemination of novel treatments. EBE-partnered research can strengthen engagement, inform best-practices, and personalize assessments of meaningful clinical change. Further, in fields adjacent to clinical psychology, EBE engagement in research is common. These facts render the virtual absence of EBE partnership from mainstream psychotherapy research especially striking. Without centering EBE views, intervention scientists cannot optimize supports for the diverse communities they aim to serve. Instead, they risk building programs that people with mental health needs may never access, benefit from, or want. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

在开发和评估心理治疗时对生活体验视角的基本需求。

本文讨论了在开发和评估心理治疗时对生活体验观点的基本需求。临床心理学的主要专业目标是为患有精神疾病或有精神疾病风险的个人和社区提供服务。迄今为止，尽管对循证治疗进行了数十年的研究并且在心理治疗研究中进行了无数的创新，但该领域仍然未能实现这一目标。简短和低强度的项目、跨诊断方法和数字心理健康工具都挑战了长期以来对“心理治疗”的假设，指出了有效护理的新途径。然而，人口层面的精神疾病发病率很高，而且还在不断上升，获得护理的机会仍然极低，获得护理的人过早退出治疗的情况很常见，科学支持的治疗很少进入日常实践。作者认为，心理治疗创新的影响受到临床心理学干预开发和评估渠道的根本缺陷的限制。。从一开始，干预科学就不再优先考虑那些我们的治疗旨在支持的观点和声音——从这里开始，“经验专家”（EBE）——在设计、评估和传播新疗法时。EBE 合作的研究可以加强参与，提供最佳实践，并对有意义的临床变化进行个性化评估。此外，在与临床心理学相邻的领域，EBE 参与研究很常见。这些事实使得 EBE 伙伴关系在主流心理治疗研究中几乎不存在尤其引人注目。如果不以 EBE 观点为中心，干预科学家就无法优化对他们旨在服务的多元化社区的支持。相反，他们冒着建立有心理健康需求的人可能永远无法获得、受益或想要的项目的风险。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2023 APA，保留所有权利）。