Bering & Eichenberg (Hrsg.) (2021): Die Psyche in Zeiten der Corona-Krise

Bering & Eichenberg (2020)

Die Corona-Krise: Jetzt der Psy­che hel­fen

3., voll­stän­dig über­ar­bei­tete und erwei­terte Neu­auf­lage 2021, ca. 350 Sei­ten, gebun­den, mit zahl­rei­chen Abbil­dun­gen
ISBN: 978–3-608–98460-6

- DAS Buch zum Thema für eine pro­fes­sio­nelle Leser­schaft
– Erläu­tert not­wen­dige Maß­nah­men in Kli­ni­ken, Hei­men, Bera­tungs­stel­len und für Nie­der­ge­las­sene
– Berück­sich­tigt die Erkennt­nisse und wis­sen­schaft­li­chen Befunde aus der Zeit der ers­ten Pan­de­mie­welle
– Erläu­tert die Beson­der­hei­ten gefähr­de­ter Ziel­grup­pen wie Allein­er­zie­hen­der, Opfer häus­li­cher Gewalt, Ein­satz­kräfte, Hin­ter­blie­be­ner und älte­rer Men­schen

Wäh­rend die in der Akut­phase der Pan­de­mie erschie­nene 1. Auf­lage das Augen­merk auf Maß­nah­men und Hil­fe­stel­lun­gen für die Phase des Lock­downs gerich­tet hatte, beschäf­tigt sich diese not­wen­dig gewor­dene Neu­auf­lage mit den mittel- und lang­fris­ti­gen Her­aus­for­de­run­gen der Pan­de­mie. Die bereits auf­ge­grif­fe­nen Fra­gen und Lösungs­an­sätze – u.a. zur Prä­ven­tion von Belas­tungs­re­ak­tio­nen, zu den Kon­zep­ten der Online-Psychotherapie oder den Hil­fen für vul­nera­ble Grup­pen wie Allein­er­zie­hende und ältere Men­schen – wer­den um neu gewon­nene Erfah­run­gen und empi­ri­sche Befunde ergänzt, die wäh­rend der ers­ten Welle in einer Viel­zahl von Stu­dien gewon­nen wer­den konn­ten. Hierzu gehö­ren auch Kon­zepte zur Erfas­sung der pan­de­mi­schen Stress­be­las­tung wie der Fra­ge­bo­gen FACT-19. In der Zwi­schen­zeit sind neue The­men­fel­der in den Vor­der­grund gerückt, etwa das der gesund­heit­li­chen Lang­zeit­fol­gen, der Aus­wir­kun­gen auf Kin­der und Jugend­li­che oder der pal­lia­tiv­me­di­zi­ni­schen Betreu­ung samt des Umgangs mit Ster­ben­den und Hin­ter­blie­be­nen.

Die an der Neu­auf­lage betei­lig­ten 30 Auto­rin­nen und Auto­ren, alle­samt Exper­tIn­nen auf ihren jewei­li­gen Gebie­ten, bli­cken zurück auf den Lock­down, schil­dern ihre Erfah­run­gen und zei­gen Per­spek­ti­ven für den zukünf­ti­gen Umgang mit den Fol­gen der Pan­de­mie auf.

Die­ses Buch rich­tet sich an:
Psy­cho­lo­gi­sche und ärzt­li­che Psy­cho­the­ra­peu­tIn­nen, psy­cho­so­ziale Aku­thel­fe­rIn­nen und trau­ma­zen­trierte Fach­be­ra­te­rIn­nen; andere sys­tem­re­le­vante Berufs­grup­pen wie Ärz­tIn­nen ande­rer Fach­rich­tun­gen; Sozi­al­ar­bei­te­rIn­nen und –päd­ago­gIn­nen.

Wei­tere Infor­ma­tio­nen auf der Verlags-Webseite

Bering, R. & Eichen­berg, C. (Hrsg.) (2021). Die Psy­che in Zei­ten der Corona-Krise. Her­aus­for­de­run­gen und Lösungs­an­sätze für Psy­cho­the­ra­peu­ten und soziale Hel­fer. Stutt­gart: Klett-Cotta.

Eichenberg et al. (2021): The Relationship Between the Implementation of Statutory Preventative Measures, Perceived Susceptibility of COVID-19, and Personality Traits in the Initial Stage of Corona-Related Lockdown: A German and Austrian Population Online Survey


Back­ground: Par­ti­cu­larly during the early and middle sta­ges of the COVID-19 pan­de­mic, a population’s com­p­li­ance with pre­cau­tio­nary mea­su­res (e.g., hygiene rules, smart working, tra­vel restric­tions, and qua­ran­tine) is para­mount in preven­ting the virus from sprea­ding.

Objec­tive: The inves­ti­ga­tion and docu­men­ta­tion of dif­fe­rent socio-demographic and personality-specific fac­tors in regards to preven­ta­tive mea­su­res and con­se­quent spe­ci­fic health beha­vi­ors during the COVID-19 pan­de­mic, based on the Health Belief Model.

Method: An online sur­vey was con­duc­ted on N = 3,006 indi­vi­du­als living in Ger­many and Aus­tria during the early sta­ges of lock­down. The ques­ti­on­naire con­sis­ted of a self-administered sec­tion, explo­ring the dimen­si­ons posi­ted in the Health Belief Model: per­cei­ved seve­rity, per­cei­ved sus­cep­ti­bi­lity, per­cei­ved bar­ri­ers, per­cei­ved bene­fits of health-promoting mea­su­res, and enga­ge­ment in health-promoting beha­vi­ors. Addi­tio­nally, the fol­lo­wing stan­dar­di­zed sca­les were used to record per­so­na­lity deter­mi­nants: the Stress Coping Style Ques­ti­on­naire SVF 78 to eva­luate coping and pro­ces­sing stra­te­gies in stress­ful cir­cum­stan­ces, the Posi­tive and Nega­tive Affect Sche­dule (PANAS) to assess the emo­tio­nal state indu­ced by the coro­na­vi­rus cri­sis, the UI-18 scale to dia­gnose the into­lerance of uncer­tainty, and the State-Trait Anxiety Inven­tory (STAI) to assess anxiety.

Results: In line with the Health Belief model, four groups were crea­ted based on per­cei­ved sus­cep­ti­bi­lity and enga­ge­ment in health-promoting beha­vi­ors, and con­se­quently stu­died in rela­tion to per­so­na­lity deter­mi­nants. Those four groups dif­fe­red signi­fi­cantly in regards to almost all per­so­na­lity dimen­si­ons (p ≤ 0.005). Group 1 (n = 450) shows a redu­ced enga­ge­ment with pro­tec­tive mea­su­res and dis­plays unde­re­sti­ma­tion of the COVID-19-pandemic. Group 2 (n = 984) dis­plays many posi­tive per­so­na­lity varia­bles and high com­p­li­ance with pro­tec­tive mea­su­res. Group 3 (n = 468) per­cei­ves the sub­jec­tive risk of disease as high, but high emo­tio­nal dis­com­fort and stress cau­sed by the pro­tec­tive mea­su­res leads to the activa­tion of a com­plex fear defense. Group 4 (n = 1,004) is highly anxious and the­re­fore com­p­li­ant.

Con­clu­si­ons: This typi­fi­ca­tion has impli­ca­ti­ons for esta­blis­hing the appro­priate sup­port sys­tems. This is par­ti­cu­larly important to encou­rage com­p­li­ance with preven­tive regu­la­ti­ons wit­hin the groups, which showed poor abidance for several rea­sons. For Group 1, fur­ther edu­ca­tion on the rea­li­s­tic threat and effi­ci­ent pro­tec­tive mea­su­res is as cen­tral as the fos­te­ring of empa­thy for others; with its resource-conscious exem­plary beha­vior Group 2 could be used as a posi­tive social role model. Group 3 would bene­fit from pro­mo­ting self-care, while Group 4 requi­res infor­ma­tion on psy­cho­so­cial assis­tance avail­a­bi­lity in order to miti­gate the high stress to which the group mem­bers are sub­jec­ted.

Read full paper

Eichen­berg, C., Gross­furth­ner, M., And­rich, J., Hüb­ner, L., Kietaibl, S., & Holocher-Benetka, S. (2019). The Rela­ti­ons­hip Bet­ween the Imple­men­ta­tion of Sta­tu­tory Preven­ta­tive Mea­su­res, Per­cei­ved Sus­cep­ti­bi­lity of COVID-19, and Per­so­na­lity Traits in the Initial Stage of Corona-Related Lock­down: A Ger­man and Aus­trian Popu­la­tion Online Sur­vey. Front. Psych­ia­try, 12, 596281. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2021.596281

Eichenberg, Schott & Schroiff (2021): Comparison of Students With and Without Problematic Smartphone Use in Light of Attachment Style


Back­ground: Nowa­days, media addic­tions are espe­cially of high rele­vance to psy­cho­the­ra­peutic prac­tice. More recently, this par­ti­cu­larly inclu­des exces­sive smart­phone usage. Even though a gro­wing num­ber of sci­en­ti­fic lite­ra­ture and also main­stream media high­light pro­ble­ma­tic smart­phone use as a serious health pro­blem, there is only little rese­arch on this issue.

Objec­tive: The aim of this study was to examine this pheno­me­non with a focus on attachment-specific dif­fe­ren­ces bet­ween stu­dents with and without pro­ble­ma­tic smart­phone use.

Method: A sur­vey was car­ried out on all enrol­led stu­dents of the Sig­mund Freud Uni­ver­sity Vienna. The Smart­phone Addic­tion Scale (SPAS) was used to dif­fe­ren­tiate bet­ween stu­dents with and without pro­ble­ma­tic smart­phone use. The attach­ment style was asses­sed using the Bie­le­feld Part­nership Expec­ta­ti­ons Ques­ti­on­naire (BFPE).

Results: Of the total sam­ple, 75 of the stu­dents (15.1%) showed a pro­ble­ma­tic smart­phone use. A posi­tive cor­re­la­tion bet­ween exces­sive smart­phone usage and an inse­cure attach­ment style was found.

Dis­cus­sion: The­rapy for pro­ble­ma­tic smart­phone use should be car­ried out in light of patient’s attach­ment style. Fur­ther rese­arch into other fac­tors of men­tal stress and per­so­na­lity is nee­ded to bet­ter under­stand pro­ble­ma­tic smart­phone use.

Read full paper

Eichen­berg, C., Schott, M., & Schroiff, A. (2019). Com­pa­ri­son of Stu­dents With and Without Pro­ble­ma­tic Smart­phone Use in Light of Attach­ment Style. Front. Psych­ia­try, 10: 61. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00681.

Eichenberg et al. (2018): Feasibility and Conceptualization of an e-Mental Health Treatment for Depression in Older Adults: Mixed-Methods Study


Back­ground: Depres­sion is one of the most com­mon men­tal dis­or­ders in older adults. Unfor­t­u­n­a­tely, it often goes unre­co­gni­zed in the older popu­la­tion.

Objec­tive: The aim of this study was to iden­tify how Web-based apps can reco­gnize and help treat depres­sion in older adults.

Methods: Focus groups were con­duc­ted with men­tal health care experts. A Web-based sur­vey of 56 older adults suf­fe­ring from depres­sion was con­duc­ted. Qua­li­ta­tive inter­views were con­duc­ted with 2 indi­vi­du­als.

Results: Results of the focus groups high­ligh­ted that there is a need for a col­la­bo­ra­tive care plat­form for depres­sion in old age. Fin­dings from the Web-based study showed that youn­ger par­ti­ci­pants (aged 50 to 64 years) used elec­tro­nic media more often than older par­ti­ci­pants (aged 65 years and older). The inter­views poin­ted in a com­pa­ra­ble direc­tion.

Con­clu­si­ons: Over­all, an e-mental (elec­tro­nic men­tal) health tre­at­ment for depres­sion in older adults would be well accep­ted. Web-based care plat­forms should be deve­lo­ped, eva­lua­ted, and in case of evi­dence for their effec­tiven­ess, inte­gra­ted into the ever­y­day cli­nic.

Full ver­sion:

Eichen­berg, C., Schott, M., Sawyer, A., Aumayr, G. & Plöß­nig, M. (2018). Fea­si­bi­lity and Con­cep­tua­liza­t­ion of an e-Mental Health Tre­at­ment for Depres­sion in Older Adults: Mixed-Methods Study. Jour­nal of Medi­cal Inter­net Rese­arch Aging, 1(2), e10973. DOI: 10.2196/10973.

Eichen­berg, Huss & Küsel (2017): From online dating to online divorce


The deve­lop­ment of digi­tal media over the last 20 years has led to seis­mic chan­ges wit­hin many aspects of daily life. This inclu­des nume­rous facets of family rela­ti­ons­hips that have not escaped the digi­tal revo­lu­tion of the last two deca­des. From the very early sta­ges of initia­ting rela­ti­ons­hips to types of post-break-up beha­vi­ors, the Inter­net has the poten­tial to play an influ­en­tial role in all areas of family and par­ti­cu­larly couple rela­ti­ons­hips. This paper exami­nes how ICTs (“infor­ma­tion and com­mu­ni­ca­tion tech­no­logy”) can shape such rela­ti­ons­hips. The impact on the various sta­ges of rela­ti­ons­hips is sys­te­ma­ti­zed (rela­ti­ons­hip deve­lop­ment, couple and family for­ma­tion, sepa­ra­tion) with a spe­cial focus on inter­ge­ne­ra­tio­nal oppor­tu­nities and con­flicts asso­cia­ted with modern media usage. Against the back­ground of psy­cho­lo­gi­cal and media com­mu­ni­ca­tion theo­ries and psy­cho­the­ra­peutic approa­ches as well as empi­ri­cal fin­dings the fol­lo­wing topics are con­side­red: 1. Initia­tion of rela­ti­ons­hips through ICTs (e.g. meet new part­ners through online dating); 2. Impact of digi­tal media on rela­ti­ons­hip deve­lop­ment and exis­ting part­nerships (e.g. new oppor­tu­nities and internet-related chal­len­ges that have to be faced by cou­ples) 3. Influ­ence of ICTs on sepa­ra­ti­ons (e.g. online media­tion, get­ting divorced online). In sum­mary, the role of ICTs in new, exis­ting and sepa­ra­ted part­nerships and fami­lies is mul­ti­fa­ce­ted. An out­look on fur­ther deve­lop­ments as well as rese­arch desi­de­rata is given.

Eichen­berg, C., Huss, J. & Küsel, C. (2017). From online dating to online divorce: An over­view of couple and family rela­ti­ons­hips shaped though digi­tal media. Con­tem­porary Family The­rapy, 39, 249–260.

Tha­b­rew, Sawyer & Eichen­berg (2018): Patient-Targeted Goog­ling by New Zea­land Men­tal Health Pro­fes­sio­nals


Back­ground: Patient-targeted goog­ling (PTG) descri­bes the sear­ching on the inter­net by health­care pro­fes­sio­nals for infor­ma­tion about pati­ents with or without their know­ledge.

Intro­duc­tion: Little rese­arch has been con­duc­ted into PTG inter­na­tio­nally. PTG can have par­ti­cu­lar ethi­cal impli­ca­ti­ons wit­hin the field of men­tal health. This study was under­ta­ken to iden­tify the extent of PTG by New Zea­land men­tal health­care pro­fes­sio­nals and needs for fur­ther gui­dance regar­ding this issue.

Mate­ri­als and Methods: All (1850) psych­ia­trists, cli­ni­cal psy­cho­lo­gists and psy­cho­the­ra­pists working in New Zea­land were elec­tro­ni­cally sur­veyed about their expe­ri­ence of PTG and know­ledge about the asso­cia­ted prac­tice of therapist-targeted goog­ling (TTG). Due to ethics and adver­ti­sing restric­tions, only one indi­rect approach was made to poten­tial par­ti­ci­pants.

Results: Eighty eight cli­ni­ci­ans (5%) respon­ded to the sur­vey invi­ta­tion. More than half (53.4%, N=47) of respond­ents repor­tedly enga­ged in PTG, but only a mino­rity (10.3%, N=9) had ever recei­ved any edu­ca­tion about the sub­ject. Rea­sons for under­ta­king PTG inclu­ded faci­li­ta­ting the the­ra­peutic pro­cess, infor­ma­tion being in the public domain and miti­ga­ting risks. Rea­sons against under­ta­king PTG inclu­ded impair­ment of the the­ra­peutic rela­ti­ons­hip, unethi­cal inva­sion of pri­vacy and con­cerns regar­ding the accu­racy and cli­ni­cal rele­vance of online infor­ma­tion. Two-thirds of par­ti­ci­pants repor­ted being the sub­ject of TTG.

Dis­cus­sion: New Zea­land psych­ia­trists, cli­ni­cal psy­cho­lo­gists and psy­cho­the­ra­pists are enga­ging in PTG with limi­ted edu­ca­tion and pro­fes­sio­nal gui­dance. Fur­ther dis­cus­sion and rese­arch are requi­red so PTG is under­ta­ken in a man­ner that is safe and use­ful for pati­ents and health prac­ti­tio­ners.

Tha­b­rew, H., Sawyer, A. & Eichen­berg, C. (2018). Patient-Targeted Goog­ling by New Zea­land Men­tal Health Pro­fes­sio­nals: A New Field Of Ethi­cal Con­side­ra­tion in the Inter­net Age. Tele­me­di­cine & e-Health, DOI: 10.1089/tmj.2017.0247.

Christiane Eichenberg und Markus Schott (2017): Serious Games for Psychotherapy: A Systematic Review


Intro­duc­tion: In the evol­ving digi­tal age, media app­li­ca­ti­ons are increa­sin­gly play­ing a grea­ter role in the field of psy­cho­the­rapy. While the Inter­net is alre­ady in the phase of being esta­blis­hed when it comes to the care of men­tal dis­or­ders, expe­ri­men­ta­tion is going on with other modern media such as serious games. A serious game is a game in which edu­ca­tion and beha­vior change is the goal, along­s­ide with enter­tain­ment.

Objec­tive: The objec­tive of the pre­sent arti­cle was to pro­vide a first empi­ri­cal over­view of serious games app­lied to psy­cho­the­rapy and psy­cho­so­ma­tic reha­bi­li­ta­tion.

Method: The­re­fore, a sys­te­ma­tic lite­ra­ture search, inclu­ding the terms “serious game” or “com­pu­ter game” and “psy­cho­the­rapy” or “reha­bi­li­ta­tion” or “inter­ven­tion” or “men­tal dis­or­ders” in the data­ba­ses Med­line and Psy­cINFO, was per­for­med. Sub­se­quently, an Inter­net search was con­duc­ted to iden­tify stu­dies not publis­hed in jour­nals. Publi­ca­ti­ons not pro­vi­ding empi­ri­cal data about effec­tiven­ess were exclu­ded.

Results: On the basis of this sys­te­ma­tic lite­ra­ture review, the results of N = 15 stu­dies met inclu­sion cri­te­ria. They uti­li­zed pri­ma­rily cogni­tive beha­vio­ral tech­ni­ques and can be use­ful for trea­ting a range of men­tal dis­or­ders. Serious games are effec­tive both as a stand-alone inter­ven­tion or part of psy­cho­the­rapy and appeal to pati­ents inde­pen­dent of age and sex.

Con­clu­si­ons: Inclu­ded serious games pro­ved to be an effec­tive the­ra­peutic com­po­nent. Nonethe­l­ess, fin­dings are not con­clu­sive and more rese­arch is nee­ded to fur­ther inves­ti­gate the effec­tiven­ess of serious games for psy­cho­the­ra­peutic pur­po­ses.

Eichen­berg, C. & Schott, M. (2017). Serious Games for Psy­cho­the­rapy: A Sys­te­ma­tic Review. Games for Health, 3, 127–135.

Eichenberg et al. (2017): Attachment Style and Internet Addiction: An Online Survey


Back­ground: One of the cli­ni­cally rele­vant pro­blems of Inter­net use is the pheno­me­non of Inter­net addic­tion. Con­side­ring the fact that there is ample evi­dence for the rela­ti­ons­hip bet­ween attach­ment style and sub­stance abuse, it stands to rea­son that attach­ment theory can also make an important cont­ri­bu­tion to the under­stan­ding of the patho­ge­ne­sis of Inter­net addic­tion.

Objec­tive:The aim of this study was to examine people’s ten­dency toward patho­lo­gi­cal Inter­net usage in rela­tion to their attach­ment style.

Methods: An online sur­vey was con­duc­ted. Soci­ode­mo­gra­phic data, attach­ment style (Bie­le­feld ques­ti­on­naire part­nership expec­ta­ti­ons), sym­ptoms of Inter­net addic­tion (scale for online addic­tion for adults), used Web-based ser­vices, and online rela­ti­ons­hip moti­ves (Cyber Rela­ti­ons­hip Motive Scale, CRMS-D) were asses­sed. In order to con­firm the fin­dings, a study using the Ror­schach test was also con­duc­ted.

Results: In total, 245 sub­jects were recrui­ted. Par­ti­ci­pants with inse­cure attach­ment style showed a hig­her ten­dency to patho­lo­gi­cal Inter­net usage com­pa­red with secu­rely atta­ched par­ti­ci­pants. An ambi­va­lent attach­ment style was par­ti­cu­larly asso­cia­ted with patho­lo­gi­cal Inter­net usage. Esca­pist and social-compensatory moti­ves played an important role for inse­cu­rely atta­ched sub­jects. Howe­ver, there were no signi­fi­cant effects with respect to Web-based ser­vices and apps used. Results of the ana­ly­sis of the Ror­schach pro­to­col with 16 sub­jects corr­o­bo­ra­ted these results. Users with patho­lo­gi­cal Inter­net use fre­quently showed signs of infan­tile rela­ti­ons­hip struc­tu­res in the con­text of social groups. This refers to the results of the Web-based sur­vey, in which inter­per­so­nal rela­ti­ons­hips were the result of an inse­cure attach­ment style.

Con­clu­si­ons: Patho­lo­gi­cal Inter­net use was a func­tion of inse­cure attach­ment and limi­ted inter­per­so­nal rela­ti­ons­hips.

Full ver­sion:

Eichen­berg, C., Schott, M., Decker, O. & Sin­delar, B. (2017). Attach­ment style and Inter­net addic­tion. Jour­nal of Medi­cal Inter­net Research,m19(5):e170, DOI: 10.2196/jmir.6694.

Christiane Eichenberg & Markus Schott (2016): An Empirical Analysis of Internet Message Boards for Self-Harming Behavior


Much debate sur­rounds the poten­tial effects of self-harm forum use. Argu­ments in favor high­light fac­tors such as pro­vi­ding access to a sup­por­tive com­mu­nity. Howe­ver cri­ti­cal voice high­light­ing poten­tial dan­gers such as forums ser­ving as a plat­form to pro­mote self-harm, clearly domi­nate the debate. Using an online ques­ti­on­naire, the goal of the cur­rent study was to examine soci­ode­mo­gra­phic cha­rac­te­ris­tics, the psy­cho­pa­tho­logy of forum users, moti­ves for par­ti­ci­pa­ting, and sub­jec­tive effects of self-harm forum use. A total of 309 self-harm forum users par­ti­ci­pa­ted in this study. 3 hete­ro­ge­neous user types with dif­fe­ring moti­ves for visit­ing the forum and dif­fe­rent usage effects were iden­ti­fied. The results ques­tion the assump­ti­ons that self-harm forums are a source of harm and point to their pre­do­mi­nantly con­struc­tive and preven­tive func­tions.

Full ver­sion:

Eichen­berg, C. & Schott, M. (2016). An Empi­ri­cal Ana­ly­sis of Inter­net Mes­sage Boards for Self-Harming Beha­vior. Archi­ves of Sui­cide Rese­arch, DOI:

Do Therapists Google Their Patients? A Survey Among Psychotherapists


Back­ground: The increa­sing use of the Inter­net and its array of social net­works brings new ways for psy­cho­the­ra­pists to find out infor­ma­tion about their pati­ents, often refer­red to as patient-targeted goog­ling (PTG). Howe­ver, this topic has been sub­ject to little empi­ri­cal rese­arch; there has been hardly any atten­tion given to it in Ger­many and the rest of Europe and it has not been inclu­ded in ethi­cal gui­de­li­nes for psy­cho­the­rapy des­pite the com­plex ethi­cal issues it rai­ses.

Objec­tive: This study explo­red Ger­man psy­cho­the­ra­pists’ beha­vior and expe­ri­en­ces rela­ted to PTG, inves­ti­ga­ted how these vary with soci­ode­mo­gra­phic fac­tors and the­ra­peutic back­ground, and explo­red the cir­cum­stan­ces in which psy­cho­the­ra­pists con­side­red PTG to be appro­priate or not.

Methods: A total of 207 psy­cho­the­ra­pists respon­ded to a newly deve­lo­ped ques­ti­on­naire that asses­sed their expe­ri­ence of and views on PTG. The study sam­ple was a non­re­pre­sen­ta­tive con­ve­ni­ence sam­ple recrui­ted online via several German-speaking pro­fes­sio­nal the­rapy plat­forms.

Results: Most the­ra­pists (84.5%, 174/207) sta­ted that they had not actively con­side­red the topic of PTG. Howe­ver, 39.6% (82/207) said that they had alre­ady loo­ked for pati­ent infor­ma­tion online (eg, when they sus­pec­ted a pati­ent may have been lying) and 39.3% (81/207) knew col­leagues or super­vi­sors who had done so. Only 2.4% (5/207) of the­ra­pists had come across PTG during their edu­ca­tion and trai­ning.

Con­clu­si­ons: It is essen­tial to pro­vide PTG as a part of the­ra­pists’ edu­ca­tion and trai­ning. Fur­ther­more, the com­plex pro­blems con­cerning PTG should be intro­du­ced into codes of ethics to pro­vide expli­cit gui­dance for psy­cho­the­ra­pists in prac­tice. This report pro­vi­des initial sug­ges­ti­ons to open up debate on this topic.

Full ver­sion:

Eichen­berg, C. & Herz­berg, P.Y. (2016). Do The­ra­pists Google Their Pati­ents? A Sur­vey Among Psy­cho­the­ra­pists. J Med Inter­net Res, 18 (1):e3. DOI: 10.2196/jmir.4306.