Exploring the Overlooked: Dutch Clinicians' Perspectives on Side Effects of Psychological Interventions

Sep 30, 2026

Uploaded by Aurelia

Steven J. Lynn (1946–2024) investigated many areas in clinical psychology, stressing the need to study side effects of psychological interventions. Across Study 1 (N = 58) and Study 2 (N = 64), researchers assessed clinicians’ perspectives on side effects. A slight majority reported familiarity and were more likely to discuss side effects. Study 2 showed clinician disagreement about avoidable, unavoidable, or nonexistent side effects, misaligned with patients’ views. Results support clear guidelines defining the full side-effect spectrum and effective patient-communication strategies, beginning with professional awareness.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryHealthcare

FormatPDF

Pages11

Reading Time28 min

AccessFree to download

Introduction

Key concepts and rationale

Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy RESEARCH ARTICLE OPEN ACCESS Exploring the Overlooked: Dutch Clinicians' Perspectives on Side Effects of Psychological Interventions Sanne T. L. Houben1 | Anna C. P. Backus1 | Harald Merckelbach1 | Brechje Dandachi-FitzGerald1,2 1Department of Clinical Psychological Science, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands | 2Faculty of Psychology, Open University, Heerlen, the Netherlands Correspondence: Sanne T. L. Houben ([sanne.houben@maastrichtuniversity.nl](sanne.houben@maastrichtuniversity.nl)) Received: 23 May 2025 | Revised: 9 December 2025 | Accepted: 17 December 2025 Keywords: clinicians | negative treatment experiences | psychological intervention | psychotherapy | side effects ABSTRACT Steven J. Lynn (1946–2024) was a prolific researcher who explored a wide array of topics in clinical psychology. He and his coauthors emphasized the importance of researching the side effects of psychological interventions. In the current studies (Study 1, N = 58; Study 2, N = 64), we examined clinicians' perspectives on side effects. A slight majority of clinicians in both studies reported familiarity with the topic (Study 1: n = 30, 51%; Study 2: n = 39, 61%). Those who claimed familiarity were more likely to discuss side effects with their patients compared with those who acknowledged a lack of knowledge. In Study 2, we found significant variation among clinicians regarding what constitutes avoidable, unavoidable or nonexistent side effects, and their views did not align with those of patients. This divergence may explain why a considerable number of clinicians refrain from discussing side effects with patients, despite patients' right to be fully informed about the potential benefits and risks of their treatment. Our findings underscore the need for clear guidelines that define the full spectrum of side effects and offer strategies for effective communication with patients. The first step in developing such guidelines is to raise awareness among professionals about the topic, which can be effectively achieved by engaging in the work of Steven J. Lynn and his co-authors, whose insights remain highly relevant. 1 | Introduction The work of Steven J. Lynn (1946–2024; Green 2024) is widely recognized in the Netherlands and Belgium. He has spoken at numerous conferences and psychological departments in these countries, and his work is extensively read. This is particularly true for The History of Hypnosis (Pintar and Lynn 2008), in which he and his co-author offer a thoughtful analysis of potential side effects of hypnotic suggestion, such as pseudomemories, identity alterations and confabulations. Similarly, Science and Pseudoscience in Clinical Psychology (Lilienfeld et al. 2003), edited by Lynn, Scott Lilienfeld and Jeffrey Lohr, has been much discussed in the Netherlands and Belgium, with chapters highlighting the harmful effects of New Age therapies and related legal issues over obtaining informed consent. The book honouring Scott Lilienfeld (Cobb et al. 2023) is also well-regarded in both countries. In their chapter, Lynn et al. (2022) revisit the topic of harmful effects and emphasize a notable asymmetry: while Lilienfeld's influential 2007 paper on therapies that harm has been cited over 1000 times, systematic research on the harmful effects of psychological interventions remains scarce. In the current study, we explored whether Lynn's advocacy for acknowledging harmful effects has resonated with Dutch clinicians to the extent that they not only recognize the issue but also have well-thought-out ideas about what constitutes side effects. Before addressing the specifics ofour study, some elaboration on key concepts is in order. | In memory of our friend and colleague Steven J. Lynn (1946-2024) . | | --- | | This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License, which permits use, distribution and reprodu

FAQs

What did the studies examine about clinicians’ views?

The studies assessed clinicians’ perspectives on side effects of psychological interventions and how familiar clinicians were with the topic.

How did clinicians’ familiarity relate to communication with patients?

Clinicians who reported familiarity were more likely to discuss side effects with their patients than those who acknowledged limited knowledge.

What major issue did the research find in Study 2?

Clinicians differed substantially in what they considered avoidable, unavoidable, or nonexistent side effects, and their views did not align with patients’ perspectives.

Sep 30, 2026

Uploaded by Aurelia