Nano psychology and Nano psychological treatmentDr. philos Philip Dammen

Introduction

This article is developed by a doctoral thesis accepted in 2013, which was a study of

psychological distress and mental change as observed via individual change through

treatment. In this article this knowledge and findings are transferred to understand and

solve pedagogical related pscyhological problems in education because of new

pedagogical related empirical experiences and findings that support the findings in the

thesis.

The thesis and the new pedagogical related experiences led to the following

questions: how are the immediate experience of pedagogical related mental problems

constructed, and what occurs psychologically when clients or student achieve mental

changes as a result of good education, special education and therapy? The purpose of

this article is to elaborate on the assumption that solving some of the pedagogically and

psychologically related problems is far more easy to treat than earlier believed by

spescialists

Abstract

The article focuses on some aspects of nano psychology concerning the mental states,

mental anchored disorders and on how to change mental diseases. The article argues

that every mental state is and emotional state and that these emotions are a result of

access to some mental elements, named the bio-psychological elements. Moreover, that

these elements are the basis for the mental diseases and must be changed to obtain

mental change because of therapy or experiences in daily life. The article also argues

that every mental change happen the same way regardless of the therapeutic method or

tradition in which the treatment is performed. One of the conclusions is that psychology

and psychiatry mostly are not sufficiently scientific, and that they have to change their

focus from information to emotions and from the outer to the inner mental experience to

build scientific knowledge upon mental diseases and psychology. The article assert that

it is possible to develop a scientific predictable and controllable approach to treat mental

anchored diseases more effective and with less loads for the patients. In addition, those

words are a kind of mental biology and the gateway to change the mental disorder, and

a prerequisite for developing a sufficiently scientific research, treatment and

diagnostics. At the end, the article argues for developing of a united scientific approach

to research and to treat mental health problems that take into account elements from the

positivistic and the qualitative research traditions. However, within the frame of the

nano psychological understanding of the psyche and of mental disorders. In this way the

article present the cornerstones in a new scientifically grounded psychology, nano

psychology, that includes research methods, treatment methods, and diagnostic

methods, statistics, analyses if clinical work and descriptions of the most dominating

therapeutic traditions in the western world.

The base for understanding the mental disorder and mental change.

Mental states and the immediate experience of mental anchored disorders are

constructed of certain mental elements, here named the bio-psychological elements that

can be observed and changed through verbal therapy. The mental states and the mental

processes leading to mental disorders can be observed by the therapist and changed by

using the language of the client. This means the words the clients are using to express

their mental pain and problem, their hopes, fantasies and mental resources. Due to the

discovery of bio-psychological elements ability to hold mental pain, one conclusion is

that the mental disorders are much easier to explain and to treat than what is believed in

psychology and psychiatry.

Is Meta research on what works in therapy biased?

These findings do confront some of the conclusions from the Meta research on what

works in therapy. More than 60 years of research on what works in therapy has shown

that some important factors is responsible for the clinical results (Duncan, Miller,

Wampold & Hubble, 2009, Lambert, Bergin & Garfiel,. 2004, Fjeldstad 2007). These

conclusions must be acknowledged. Still, this evaluation-research do have some

systematic errors concerning validity. Why? The common factor (Fjeldstad 2007) do

count, but the meta researchers have overlooked, like other psychological and

psychiatric research projects, the most important common factors for results in therapy,

the mental elements that hold emotions and the mental biological nature and importance

of words both for the mental disease and for mental change.

The similarities between patients and well-functioning individuals.

The discovery, after ten years of research, of the characteristics of the bio-psychological

elements holding the mental disorders, can be used to explain why the similarities

between patients with a mental disorder and mentally well-functioning people are more

important for treatment than the differences between them. In addition, the bio-

psychological elements can explain how we can use the mental abilities that the patients

have in common with well-functioning individuals to recover from mental problems

(Dammen, 2013). In addition, they can explain how and why the similarities between

patients with different diagnoses are more interesting for the therapeutic field than the

differences between them. These statements are controversial if we look upon the

efforts put down in investigating and discriminating between mental diseases.

The bio-psychological elements, Words and emotions

To understand the importance of the verbal bio-psychological elements for the mental

disorder and for mental change, we have to understand words as a mental biological

phenomenon, not only as information about mental pain, mental disease or mental

change (Dammen, 2013a,b). We have to understand that every single word and thought

is a mental-biological element bearing emotions. This understanding is crucial to

understand the connection between words and emotions and that the use of words may

change the mental state and the mental disorder. Moreover, it is crucial to understand

why it is possible to change the mental state and the mental disease just by using certain

words in some therapeutic minutes.

The most significant aspect of words in therapy lies in understanding the connection

between the biological and the emotional aspect of words, and not in understanding

words only as information, when listening to the patients. Words are the gateway to

understand the mental states and the mental diseases. This is crucial to understand and

investigate the mental states and the mental anchored diseases, and to develop a

sufficiently scientific approach to treatment.

The bio-psychological elements and the mental disorders

The fact that stem cells can be all organs before they have sealed their destiny

(http://genisidene, 2013), and that the numbers 0 and 1 is the basic for all text, sounds

and pictures in data gave birth to the idea that one type mental of elements could be the

building block for all emotions and for all mental states. And to the idea that changes in

access to these elements were the basics for all mental changes in daily life and in

therapy (Dammen,2013b). After years of research, I found these element and they were

named bio-psychological elements. These mental elements are the basics for all mental

states and all emotions, and this element has to be changed to obtain results in therapy

(Dammen, 2013b). Further analyses led to the conclusion that there was only 1 mental

anchored disorder, and not 400 different mental illnesses as mentioned in the

international diagnostic systems ICD11 (Helsedirektoratet, 2011) and DSM IV (APA,

2011). This means that every mental anchored emotional state is a result of access to

some verbal, modal, kinaesthetic, auditory elements, and sometimes taste and smell.

One of the conclusions is that different mental based disorders are based upon the same

mental-biological material, and that they are developed within the same mental

processes and the same mental-biological brain structure. Because of this, we can

observe and treat every different mental anchored disorder the same way, just by

altering or by replacing bio-psychological elements bearing mental pain with mental

elements containing wellbeing and adequate reactions. In principle, it is easy, in

practice, it may claim a lot of work, and sometimes the patients are producing mental

pain faster in daily life than the therapist can cure within 60 minutes a week. Why is this

possible? Because changing the access to bio-psychological elements holding severe

mental pain will not only alter the dysfunctional mental processes and remove the

source for the emotional pain etc., but opens up for more adequate mental reactions as a

result from the reduced access to mental pain (Dammen, 2013 a). Later analysis led to

the article “Logic, biology and psyche” in which I am verifying my therapeutic research

results through logic argumentation (ibid). These analyses contributed to simplicity.

From focusing on the client’s thoughts, social situations and on the content of the

patients mental experiences, I focused on the mental-biological structure of the mental

disorder and on the phenomenon mental change. One aim was to discover how many

mental strategies that existed that could lead to an emotional change. I found 12

different main mental states and 12 different strategies for mental change. Six strategies

in life or in therapy leading to wellbeing and six leading to psychological distress. The

variables was the dimensions: “on or off”, “positive or negative and “past, present and

future", in total 12 possibilities when multiplied (Dammen, 2013 b).

Every positive therapeutic intervention must take place within these 6 positive

strategies: The first three take place when bio-psychological elements holding positive

emotions related to the past, present and future are coupled to the mental state. The next

3 place when bio-psychological elements that contain mental pain related to the past,

present and the future are decoupled form the immediate mental state. These 6

possibilities of positive mental changes are a key to understand how the psychological

problems are experienced, And a key to understand how they might be changed through

therapy, or in daily life. These findings in addition with the discovery of the bio-

psychological element make it possible to understand every mental change and the

principle of how to treat people with every day mental problems and mental anchored

disorders.

The simplicity of mental change

What is mentioned above may be supported by the following argumentation: One of the

characteristics of the psyche is that it has an overall ability to react simple in spite of the

more complex social situation in which the individual is located. In daily life, man must

have the ability to react immediately and fast. If not we will not survive. This leads to

the assertion that the simpler the process of change will be, the easier it will be to get

results from therapy. And to the idea that the more the mental processes in therapy are

similar to the changing process in everyday life, the faster we can achieve results in

therapy. In other words. The way we change in therapy must reflect or be a parallel to

how we change emotionally in everyday life. A therapist who is working slowly due to

an extensive knowledge of the complexity of the mental disorder may reduce the pace

of the change process. My experience from around 5000 hours with therapy and

approximately 6000 000 statements from me and my patients are coherent. It shows that

the clients average amount of small and immediate changes within one nano therapeutic

therapy session lasting around 60 minutes is around one hundred. And that mental

change may happen for some patients exceptionally fast, just as fast as the brain can

process information. This is not opposing the fact that some clients may need relatively

comprehensive time in therapy.

These experiences and statements are controversial to the medical based psychiatry, the,

psychoanalytical (Haugsgjerd, 1972, Haugsgjerd, Jensen & Karlsson, 1998), existential

(Yalom, 1990) and gestalt therapy (Hostrup, 2009 and often the cognitive way (Berge &

Repål, 2008, 2010 of understanding the mental disorders and the phenomenon mental

change (Berge& Repål, 2008, 2010) . However, they are to a certain degree familiar

with views in the MRI tradition (Watzlawick, Weakland, & Fisch, 1980), the Solution

focused tradition (deShazer, 1985, 1988, 1994), the Postmodern tradition

(Andersen,1997, Anderson, 1997), the Narrative tradition (White & Epston 1990, 1985,

Lundby, 1998)24) Neurolinguistic programming (Bandler, 1988, Bandler & Grinder,

1979) and with some elements in cognitive therapy

The need for information when doing therapy.

My therapeutic experiences and my research show that it is possible to treat mental

anchored disorders almost without information about the client’s life and the mental

disease (Dammen 2013a). Why? Because the clients know everything there is to know

about his situation and his pain, even if his is not telling his story to the therapist. This

situation makes it possible to act upon the patients’ knowledge and experiences

indirectly. The therapist only need to know the properties of the bio-psychological

elements holding the patients emotions, the fact that words are biology and emotions,

the 6 strategies for positive mental change, methods to change the bio-psychological

element holding mental pain, and the use of transformation (Dammen, 2013a). Mental

transformations means the possibility to alter the way emotions are stored. Sometimes

the clients emotions are stored on psychological elements that are less changeable,

which makes it necessary to transform an emotion to a more changeable bio-

psychological element, for instance from an unspecific modal quality to a visual bio-

psychological element. Visual bio-psychological elements are easier to change than

perceptual unspecific mental elements (ibid).

These possibilities make it possible to treat people regardless of gender, cultural or

religious background and without knowing the clients mental experiences. This

sometimes is useful due to the clients need for keeping some private information

confidential in order to protect other people. However, this may change our

understanding of mental diseases, and about what information is needed to obtain

results in therapy. It may also make treatments more effective because the therapist can

concentrate on important factors for achieving results, and discriminate these factors

from interesting, but less applicable information.

The assertion based on my therapeutic experiences and my research is that most

therapists are gathering more information about the client’s history, thoughts and

everyday life than they can utilize in therapy and that is crucial to obtain mental change.

Too much information will also make it difficult to focus on the essential factors for

mental change, and it will be more difficult to point more exactly on what part of the

therapy that really made the change, when mental change is obtained. More information

than needed makes it also difficult to discover where the therapists have failed if the

clients do not recover through therapy. My assertion is the psychologists and

psychiatrist are using far too much efforts and time in assessing the clients state. A

psychologist once said. The less we know about how to treat the mental disorder the

more time we are using to assess the clients mental state.

The bio-psychological elements and scientific theory and research

Another consequence of the bio-psychological elements is that they make it possible to

develop scientific knowledge about the psyche, mental anchored diseases and the

mental processes leading to or out of mental disorders, only through logical reasoning. I

find this important due to the situation that behavioral therapy, psychoanalyses

psychodynamic therapy, cognitive therapy, strategic, structural and systemic therapy,

and postmodern and narrative therapy are not capable of developing a sufficiently

scientifically knowledge about mental problems, and mental change, despite their vast

knowledge and often good results in therapy. However, cognitive theory (Berge &

Repål, 2008, 2010) and Neurolinguistic Programming (Bandler,1988, Bandler &

Grinder, 1979, 1982, Bandler & MacDonald, 1988) are from different perspectives,

closer to understand the bio-psychological elements than other therapeutic traditions.

Despite the fact that all therapeutic traditions get results (Duncan, Miller, Wampold &

Hubble, 2009, Lambert, Bergin & Garfield, 2004), some crucial questions about how

the mental disease is constructed and what is happening mental-biologically when there

is a mental change because of therapy, is still unresolved.

If these reviews look hard to accept, just ask any researcher or therapist following

questions: What is the mental-biological basis for the experience of mental pain? What

are the mental-biological difference and similarities between different mental disorders?

What kind of mental-biological material is the building blocks for the mental disorder?

What does happen mentally when there is a mental change because of therapy? When,

exactly in the consultation do the mental change happen? How can we objectively

observe the mental disorder as mental biological phenomena? My assertions are that

you will not get any falsifiable answers. Why? Because neither the therapists nor

researchers know exactly what constitutes the emotional states. Therefore, psychiatry

and psychology will not reach their ultimate goal of creating a strict and predictable

scientific approach to research, diagnose and treat mental disorders – if they do not

change their focus from information about the mental disorder to the mental-biological

structure of the mental health problems.

The positivistic paradigm (Befring, 2007, Wormnæs, 1987) and the paradigm of

qualitative research (Alvesson & Skjøldberg, 1994, Wifstad, 1997,Yin, 2008) like

hermeneutics (Alvesson & Skjøldberg, 1994), phenomenology (ibid), social

constructionism (Wifstad, 1997, Gergen, 1985, 2009) contains barriers against

developing a verifiable and objective scientific knowledge about mental states, mental

processes, and mental change. They have both, from different perspectives, through

their ideals rejected the possibility to objectively observe emotions, mental states and

the mental processes leading to mental disorders or to wellbeing. These paradigms have

to be changed before the psychological science can develop a sufficient scientific

knowledge upon mental diseases. The prerequisite is that these paradigms change their

focus from behavior, from thoughts as content, from words as information and from

interpretations of mental states to precise observations of the elements that mentally

anchor behavior, emotions, words and mental pain.

The dominating paradigms in psychology or psychiatry are not capable of producing

scientific falsifiable (Popper, 2002) knowledge about emotions and mental states.

Therefore, the knowledge produced is characterized by systematic errors with respect to

the validity. We have to combine elements within these two paradigms and then focus

on mental biology, the bio-psychological elements. Randomized trials, the golden

standard for research within psychology and psychiatry, cannot outweigh this situation

without changing the focus from what I will call outer empiricism to the inner

empiricism, to emotions. It must be added that if we understand how emotions are

constructed in one client our knowledge will count for all clients and all human beings,

due to the fact that the mental biological structure are equal for every man. The

conclusion is that randomized controlled trials are not an adequate tool to investigate the

mental disorder as an emotional state - if they are focusing on the same types of

information as presently. We will still need randomized controlled trials for doing

research on important differences within the mental biological structure. This is

possible, but will not be elaborated in this article.

It will still be possible to conduct naturalistic acceptable empirical research on mental

states and processes and to practice a scientifically based therapy. The word

“scientifically” means here a therapeutic model, which is predictable and controllable.

The bio-psychological elements and Diagnostic systems ICD11 and DSM IV.

The discovery of the properties of the bio-psychological elements led to an investigation

on the validity of diagnoses in the international diagnostic system ICD10

(Helsedirektoratet, 2011), mostly used in Europe, and the DSM IV (APA, 2011) mostly

used in USA. The conclusion was that these research based diagnostic systems have a

wrong focus in the way that they are naming different mental disorders without focusing

at the mental elements that are anchoring the clients emotional experiences. In other

words, highly qualified researchers from all over the globe have used accepted scientific

methods on quasi-scientific objects to investigate the mental disorders. Which means

that they have focused on mental objects that do not fulfill the criteria for being used as

naturalistic research object. As a result, all diagnoses do have systematic errors

concerning validity – if the target is to develop scientific and controllable knowledge of

mental disorders, on how they are constructed, and on how can we change the mental

disorder effectively and scientifically through therapy.

There is more to say about the international diagnostic systems, but this will lead

beyond the aim of this article. What is important is the that ICD 11 and DSM IV do

have a wrong focus that lead to psychological biased information about the psyche and

the mental diseases with the consequence that diagnoses from these systems are not

valid expressions of the mental disorders as emotional experiences. This does not mean

that the diagnostic systems will lose their value, generally spoken; only that that they

have to be supplied with verifiable and falsifiable information about mental anchored

diseases as mental biological states. Diagnoses is actually definitions adopted i medical

congresses (Watzlawick, Weakland & Fisch, 1980) and do not have sufficiently

scientific value. As a result, diagnoses from ICD 11 and DSM IV make it close to

impossible to understand the key nature of the mental disorders as mental biological

phenomena and the bio-psychological elements that anchor emotions experienced.

These diagnostic systems may therefore lead to more psychological problems than they

reduce, when they are used as a base for therapy. We need a diagnostic system, based

on the bio-psychological elements role in developing and changing of the mentally

anchored states and disorders. This diagnostic system is under construction and is called

NADIS, the Nano-diagnostic system for diagnosing mental anchored disorders.

There is only one psyche and one mental anchored psychological disease

There is only one main brain structure, one mental-biological base for the psyche and

mental states, and only one right answer to the question of how the mental biological

structure and the psyche is constructed. By saying this, I am not reducing psyche to

neurobiology. If the neurobiologists do not understand the link between the

neurobiological states, emotions and words, they will not understand their findings. In

addition, they will, to a less degree, be able to use their findings to treat people with

mentally anchored diseases. I am either not reducing the importance of the knowledge

developed in the social constructionist therapeutic traditions like solution focused

(deShazer, 1985, 1988, 1994), narrative (White & Epston 1990, 1985, Lundby, 1988)

and postmodern therapy (Andersen, 1997, Anderson, 1997), or the social constructionist

elements in cognitive therapy and in modern psychoanalyses (Haugsgjerd, Jensen, &

Karlsson, 1998) . We also have to take into account the language research from

Wittgenstein (Wittgenstein, 2008) the attitudes and the knowledge of social

constructionist Kenneth Gergen (Gergen, 1985, 2009), and the Meta research

knowledge upon the common factors that count for results in therapy, given to us by

Barry Duncan and Scott Miller (Duncan, Miller, Wampold & Hubble, 2009, Fjeldstad

2007). Therefore, I do not mean to poor out the baby by the bath water. However, we

still need to be critical against the legitimateness for the medical based psychiatry, even

if we should embrace their positivistic scientific values, just as if we should embrace

research values in the qualitative research without losing the sight of the bio-

psychological elements. The challenges is to know which thoughts and criteria that we

shall use for what purpose and in which situations.

The need for Rewriting psychology

Findings in my project show that some accepted knowledge in psychology and

psychiatry are based on qualified guesses and speculations more than on scientific

research. This situation makes it necessary to rewrite some parts in psychology and

psychiatry concerning mental disorders, mental health, mental processes, mental

change, and on the possibilities for getting results in therapy.

The bio-psychological elements and scientific community

In the therapeutic society, we have the situation that many therapist never use a

diagnostic system as their basis for therapy, researchers and diagnosticians that never

have treated a client and therapists that never have been into therapeutic research.

Therapy, research and diagnostics are divided into fields with some time little or no

contact. In addition, we have around 400 diagnoses for mental disorders and more than

400 ways to treat them (Duncan, Miller, Wampold & Hubble, 2009,) but no

scientifically understanding of the mental disorders as mental-biological emotional

state. Even the neuroscientists do not understand the connection between the results

from neuro-scientific research and the mental-biological structure of the mental

diseases. The reason for this Babylonian situation is the lack of knowledge of a mental-

biological element holding emotions and mental pain. Scientific knowledge of these

mental elements could be the common base for research, treatment and diagnostics. As

long as we have this Babylonian situation, psychology and psychiatry will produce

more names on different mental disorders, but will still not be able to develop the

ultimate scientific knowledge of mental states, processes and of mental diseases and

wellbeing

The need for a united psychological science is greater than ever before, and it is

possible. Why. We are all working with the same brain structure, and there is only one

neurological base for the psyche and mental processes. In addition, even the deepest

unconscious mind exists just some inches from the skull wall. Frankly, the brain is

extremely complex, but the psyche is simple. So simple that its simplicity is making it

very hard for highly educated and knowledgeable specialists to accept. This said

because we have to change our paradigms and start over again when investigating

mental states and disorders. Then we will discover that all our deep and vast knowledge

would be highly interesting, just from another viewpoint. Instead of Plato’s allegory of

the cave where people first discovered the world when they went outside and saw the

light, we only need to light our own cave or change the angel of the existing light. This

can give birth to a united science for understanding the human psyche built upon what

we already know, in addition to knowledge of the properties of bio-psychological

elements - except for some crucial changes in viewpoint. We can still use our

knowledge bricks to build an integrated scientific knowledge about mental states,

mental diseases and wellbeing by combining postmodern research values with the

values and preciseness of the positivistic approach. However, they both have to kill

some of their darlings.

Nano psychology, Nano therapy, Nano-psychological research and the Nano-diagnostic system (NADIS)

For me this united solution lies in Nano-psychology, in Nano-psychological research

methods and in the Nano-diagnostic system, NADIS. Why? Due to my research results,

it is possible to understand, to research and to change all mental anchored states and

diseases. In addition, to develop a scientific predictable and controllable approach to get

rid of mentally based learning problems, and to develop wellbeing and mental skills, all

within the same approach and methods.

The basics for this possibility is the discovery of the smallest mental element that could

hold an emotion. The bio-psychological element makes it is possible to build or reduce

emotional states just by altering the existing, or by producing new bio-psychological

elements through therapy, education or communication.

Nano-psychology and Nano-therapy is a result from a combination of the positivistic

and humanistic approach to understand, and to treat mental diseases. Why positivism?

Because this tradition is holding on to important scientific values and valuable scientific

ideas. Why not positivism alone? Because this tradition have rejected the possibility of

research emotions and the inner mental life. Why the qualitative approach? Due to its

respect for and belief in patients, their willingness and skill to communicate and their

believe in the dialogue as a tool for mental change. Why not the qualitative tradition

alone? Because they have rejected the possibility to conduct natural research on

emotions, like the positivistic tradition. And because the qualitative tradition is too

much into interpretation and hermeneutics when investigating the mental disease. This

in the sense that they are not clear enough upon what sort of information upon mental

diseases that are interpretable, and what kind of information from the patients that will

be destroyed when interpreted by the therapist or diagnostician. And their tendency to

produce valuable scientific literature, literature in the sense that the assertions and

hypothesis behind the research are not sufficient falsifiable. However, the qualitative

traditions are still important. Why? Because some solution oriented, narrative oriented

and postmodern therapists, among other socialconstructionistic and hermeneutic

inspired therapists are giving the patients the feeling of being respected and loved. In a

way they are living Carl Roger`s and Otto Rank`s ideas of humanistic therapy even if

they are not aware of it. With the result that the patients are able to say an emotionally

based, “yes” in the therapeutic moment. This emotionally based “yes” is a prerequisite

for a mental change in therapy. However, a good relationship between the patient and

the therapist is not only a matter of realizing humanistic values. The patient’s

experience of a good relationship is a mental biological prerequisite for their ability to

say an emotional yes to the mental changes offered by the therapists. It is important to

know that the patients “yes” is a mental biological state where change can happen.

Underlying this, the main idea is that emotionally pain and the feeling of wellbeing is a

result of access to some observable mental biological elements bearing emotions, and

that these mental elements can be observed and changed through therapy.

Where we should, we place nano psychology and nano therapy in the scientific and

therapeutic picture? Nano-psychology is as a branch of cognitive psychology like all

verbal therapeutic traditions. Why all therapeutic traditions? Regardless of theoretical

background, all verbal therapies obtain results because they are using words, and words

are cognitive elements. Different therapeutic traditions are just using words different

ways and with a different focus. Their main tool to obtain mental changes are still

words. Then we all could have common focus, the link between words and mental

changes.

It may also be added that all therapeutic traditions mostly are getting good results

(Duncan, Miller, Wampold & Hubble, 2009, Lambert,, Bergin & Garfield, 2004).

Sufficiently scientific based knowledge is therefore not always necessary to get results

in therapy, but it helps if the therapist are trying to understand why their methods do not

work even if the same methods have helped other patients.

References

Alvesson, M & Skjøldberg. K. (1994). Tolkning og refleksjon. Studentlitteratur. Lund.

Sweden.

Andersen T. The Reflecting Team. (1997). Dialogue and meta-dialogue in clinical

work. Family Process 1987; 26,415-428.

Anderson H. (1997). Conversation, Language, And Possibilities. A Postmodern

Approach To Therapy. Basic Books: NY, US,

APA. (2011). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: DSM-IV.

American Psychiatric Association: US.

Bandler R & Grinder J. Frogs into Princes: Neuro Linguistic Programming. Real

People Press: Utah, US, 1979.

Bandler R & Grinder J. (1982). Reframing: Neuro-Linguistic Programming and the

Transformation of Meaning. Real People Press: Utah, US.

Bandler R. (1988). Using Your Brain for a Change. Real People Press: Utah, US.

Bandler, R., & MacDonald, W. (1998). An insiders Guide to Sub-Modalities.

Metapublications.

Befring, E. Forskningsmetode med etikk og statistikk. Oslo: Samlaget.

Berge, T., & Repål, A. (2007). Den indre samtalen: lær deg kognitiv terapi. Oslo:

Gyldendal akademisk. 2010.

Berge, T., & Repål, A. (2008). Håndbok i kognitiv terapi. Oslo: Gyldendal Akademisk.

Bhaskar, R.A. (1997). "A Realist Theory of Science," London: Version. ISBN 1-85984-

103-1. 1997

Damasio A. Descartes. (2000). Feiltagelse: fornuft, følelser og menneskehjernen. Pax:

Oslo, Norway, 2004. Translated from: Descartes’ Error. Emotion, Reason, and

the Human Brain. Amazon, NY, USA,

Damasio A. (2002). Følelsen av hva som skjer: kroppens og emosjonenes betydning

for bevisstheten. Pax: Oslo, Norway, Translated from: The Feeling of What

Happens: Body and Emotion in the Making of Consciousness. Amazon: Ny,

USA,.

Dammen ph. (2013 a). Logic, Biology and Psyche. Psychology and Behavioral

Sciences. Vol. 2, No. 3, 2013, pp. 106-111. doi: 10.11648/j.pbs.20130203.14

Dammen Ph. (2013b) (Translated from Norwegian: A study of psychological distress

and mental change as a result of treatment Akademika forlag: Oslo, Norway

deShazer S. (1985). Keys to Solutions in Brief Therapy. W. W. Norton & Company:

NY, US.

deShazer, S. Clues. (1988). Investigating Solutions in Brief Therapy. W.W. Norton &

Company: NY, US.

deShazer, S. (1994). Words Were Originally Magic (1.utg.). W. W. Norton & Company.

Duncan BL, Miller SD, Wampold BE & Hubble MA. The Heart and Soul of Change.

Delivering What Works in Therapy. American Psychological Association:

Washington, US, 2009.

Gergen, K. Relational being. Oxford University Press, New York: 2009.

Gergen, K. The social constructionist movement in modern psychology. American

Psychologist, 40, 266-275. 1985.

Haugsgjerd, S. (1972). Nytt perspektiv på psykiatrien. Oslo: Pax.

Haugsgjerd, S., Jensen, P., & Karlsson, B. (1998). Perspektiver på psykisk lidelse: en

innføring for helse- og sosialfagene. Oslo: Ad notam Gyldendal.

Helsedirektoratet. (2011). ICD-10: den internasjonale statistiske klassifikasjon av

sykdommer og beslektede helseproblemer: systematisk del, alfabetisk indeks.:

Helsedirektoratet. Oslo, Norway.

Hostrup, H. (2009). Gestaltterapi: Indføring i gestaltterapiens grundbegreber.

København: Hans Reitzel.

http://gensidene.uib.no/stamceller.html (28.04.2015)

I Fjeldstad T. mfl. (2007). Klienten den glemte terapeut. Gyldendal forlag.

Lambert J, Bergin FJ & Garfield SL. (2004). Bergin and Garfield’s Handbook of

Psychotherapy and Behavior Change. Wiley: New York, US.

Lundby, G. (1998). Historier og terapi: om narrativer, konstruksjonisme og nyskriving

av historier. [Oslo]: Tano Aschehoug.

Popper K. (2002). The Logic of Scientific Discovery. Routledge Classics, UK

Popper, K. R. (2002). Conjectures and refutations: the growth of scientific knowledge.

Routledge. Classic. 2.ed. Amazon.

Watzlawick, P., Weakland, J. H., & Fisch, R. (1980). Forandring: prinsipper fra

psykoterapien. Oslo: Gyldendal.

White M. & Epston D. (1990). Narrative Means to Therapeutic Ends. W. W. Norton &

Company: NY, US.

White M. & Epston D. (1995).Re-Authering Lives. Interviews & Essays. Dulwich

Centre Publications: Adelaide, Australia.

Wifstad, Å. (1997). Vilkår for begrepsdannelse og praksis i psykiatri: en filosofisk

undersøkelse. Tano Aschehoug, [Oslo].

Wittgenstein L. (2001). Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. Routledge: London, UK,

Wormnæs, O. (1987).Vitenskapsfilosofi. 2. ed. Ad Notam Gyldendal.

Yalom, I. D. (1980). Existential Psychotherapy (1. utg.). Basic Books.

Yin, R. K. (2008). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. (Fourth Edition).

California. Sage Publications, Inc.

References

[01] Duncan BL, Miller SD, Wampold BE & Hubble MA. The Heart and Soul of Change. Delivering What Works in Therapy. American Psychological Association: Washington, US, 2009.

[02] Lambert J, Bergin FJ & Garfield SL. Bergin and Garfield’s Handbook of Psychotherapy and Behavior Change. Wiley: New York, US 2004.

[03] I Fjeldstad T. mfl. (2007). Klienten den glemte terapeut. Gyldendal forlag.[05] Dammen ph. Logic, Biology and Psyche. Psychology and Behavioral Sciences.

Vol. 2, No. 3, 2013, pp. 106-111. doi: 10.11648/j.pbs.20130203.14[06] http://gensidene.uib.no/stamceller.html (28.04.2015)[07] Dammen Ph. (Translated from Norwegian: A study of psychological distress

and mental change as a result of treatment Akademika forlag: Oslo, Norway, 2013.

[08] Helsedirektoratet. ICD-10: den internasjonale statistiske klassifikasjon av sykdommer og beslektede helseproblemer: systematisk del, alfabetisk indeks.: Helsedirektoratet. Oslo, Norway, 2011.

[09] APA. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: DSM-IV. American Psychiatric Association: US, 2011.

[10] Haugsgjerd, S. Nytt perspektiv på psykiatrien. Oslo: Pax. 1972.[11] Haugsgjerd, S., Jensen, P., & Karlsson, B. (1998). Perspektiver på psykisk

lidelse: en innføring for helse- og sosialfagene. Oslo: Ad notam Gyldendal.[12] Yalom, I. D.). Existential Psychotherapy (1. utg.). Basic Books. 1980[13] Hostrup, H. Gestaltterapi: Indføring i gestaltterapiens grundbegreber.

København: Hans Reitzel. 2009.[14] Berge, T., & Repål, A. Håndbok i kognitiv terapi. Oslo: Gyldendal Akademisk.(2008.[15] Berge, T., & Repål, A. Den indre samtalen: lær deg kognitiv terapi. Oslo:

Gyldendal akademisk. 2010.[16] Watzlawick, P., Weakland, J. H., & Fisch, R. Forandring: prinsipper fra

psykoterapien. Oslo: Gyldendal. 1980.[17] Shazer, S. Clues: Investigating Solutions in Brief Therapy. W.W. Norton &

Company: NY, US, 1988.[18] Shazer S. Keys to Solutions in Brief Therapy. W. W. Norton & Company: NY, US, 1985.[19] Shazer, S. de. Words Were Originally Magic (1. utg.). W. W. Norton &

Company. 1994.[20] Andersen T. The Reflecting Team. Dialogue and meta-dialogue in clinical

work. Family Process 1987; 26,415-428. 1997.[21] Anderson H. Conversation, Language, And Possibilities: A Postmodern

Approach To Therapy. Basic Books: NY, US,[22] White M. & Epston D. Narrative Means to Therapeutic Ends. W. W. Norton &

Company: NY, US. 1990.

[23] White M. & Epston D.. Re-Authering Lives. Interviews & Essays. Dulwich Centre Publications: Adelaide, Australia, 1995.

[24] Lundby, G. Historier og terapi: om narrativer, konstruksjonisme og nyskriving av historier. [Oslo]: Tano Aschehoug. 1998.

[25] Bandler R. Using Your Brain for a Change. Real People Press: Utah, US, 1988.[26] Bandler R & Grinder J. Frogs into Princes: Neuro Linguistic Programming. Real

People Press: Utah, US, 1979.[27] Bandler R & Grinder J. Reframing: Neuro-Linguistic Programming and the

Transformation of Meaning. Real People Press: Utah, US, 1982.[28] Bandler, R., & MacDonald, W. (1998). An insiders Guide to Sub-Modalities.

Metapublications.[30] Befring, E. Forskningsmetode med etikk og statistikk. Oslo: Samlaget. 2007.[31] Wormnæs, O. Vitenskapsfilosofi. 2. ed. Ad Notam Gyldendal. 1987.[32] Alvesson, M & Skjøldberg . K. Tolkning og refleksjon. Studentlitteratur. Lund.

Sweden. 1994.[33] Wifstad, Å. Vilkår for begrepsdannelse og praksis i psykiatri: en filosofisk

undersøkelse. Tano Aschehoug, [Oslo]. 1997.[34] Yin, R. K. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. (Fourth Edition).

California. Sage Publications, Inc. 2008.[35] Gergen, K. Relational being. Oxford University Press, New York: 2009.[36] Gergen, K. The social constructionist movement in modern psychology.

American Psychologist, 40, 266-275. 1985.[37] Popper, K. R. Conjectures and refutations: the growth of scientific knowledge.

Routledge. Classic. 2.ed. Amazon. 2002.[37b] Popper K. The Logic of Scientific Discovery. Routledge Classics, UK 2002.[38] Bhaskar, R.A., "A Realist Theory of Science," London: Version. ISBN 1-85984-

103-1. 1997 [1975],[38] Wittgenstein L. Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. Routledge: London, UK, 2001.[39] Damasio A. Følelsen av hva som skjer: kroppens og emosjonenes betydning for

bevisstheten. Pax: Oslo, Norway, Translated from: The Feeling of What Happens: Body and Emotion in the Making of Consciousness. Amazon: Ny, USA, 1999. 2002.

[40] Damasio A. Descartes’ Feiltagelse: fornuft, følelser og menneskehjernen. Pax: Oslo, Norway, 2004. Translated from: Descartes’ Error. Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain. Amazon, NY, USA, 2000.

988