Contextual therapy focusses on restoring and enhancing relationships, based on its paradigm of relational ethics, presuming a human tendency for reciprocal care. It is precisely in a time of stressed relationships that this focus on strengthening humanity is of great importance. This article presents the first study on the application of this paradigm into concrete interventions of twelve current contextual therapists, answering the question: How do contextual therapists apply the contextual theory and therapy into concrete interventions? Using the Thematic Analysis, fourteen therapy sessions were analyzed, revealing a typical working-method and eight characteristic categories of interventions. The findings of this qualitative research reveal a consistent working-method and several recognizable contextual elements. These may contribute to further integrating the paradigm of relational ethics in family therapy and developing a contemporary contextual guideline for therapy. It also provides a conditional step for investigating the efficacy of contextual therapy, for evidence-based research, and for further development of the methodology of contextual therapy.
This article presents a model for conducting contextual therapy with the aim of contributing to the further development of contextual therapy. Its founder, Ivan Boszormenyi-Nagy, introduced the core of this approach, relational ethics, as a new paradigm for family therapy, which has been received well. The authors presume that the training of (upcoming) contextual therapists and conducting contextual therapy itself can benefit from more concrete guidelines and a phased structure. It can also enhance the further development, research and accountability of this approach. Therefore, using a design-oriented method, the authors developed a model that helps to shape a contextual therapy process and the applicable contextual interventions. It is based on strengthening connectedness in close relationships, using relational ethics as its compass. The framework of the model consists of three phases: exploring connectedness in close relationships, modifying connectedness in close relationships and reinforcing connectedness in close relationships, whereby the goals of each of these phases are defined as process elements and expanded into guidelines for nineteen interventions. The ingredients for these interventions are derived from two recent studies on the practice of Nagy and on the practice of current contextual therapists. The model is explained and substantiated based on contextual theory and therapy. Final remarks are presented in the conclusion.
Within a field that has prioritized ideas of a global tourism industry impacting on a local environment, less attention has been given to regional, cultural, and geographic differences and parallels. A problematic concern in the study of tourism was perhaps the lack of contextualization and the integration of the units of analysis (e.g., tourist destinations) to the larger regional structures and societal processes. We wish to take up the challenge to further disturb the foundations of the field and, more importantly, to participate in the advancement of a more pluralist discourse. A central component in this article is a 5-day study visit in Siem Reap, Cambodia as part of an Asia-based fieldwork of bachelor students in tourism development at NHTV University of Applied Sciences in Breda, The Netherlands. This study visit serves as an illustration of the contextual education approach developed in the tourism course and facilitated by the international classroom setting. This fieldwork's philosophy and the inspirational encounters made possible by it is an attempt to address the challenges posed by the study of the dynamism and changing character of destinations. To conclude we will bring forward selected student experiences as well as dimensions of Cambodian history and society that have enriched our understanding of Siem Reap as a destination. This experience will fuel a discussion on knowledge production in tourism and on the added value of this contextual education approach. The repeated opportunity for our students to meet, think, and reflect on what they were confronted with created a possibility to uncover more than would have been possible via standard research methods using surveys and interviews.
MULTIFILE
