See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/272686792

Existential Psychotherapies: Similarities and

Differences Among the Main Branches

Article  in  Journal of Humanistic Psychology · January 2014

DOI: 10.1177/0022167816653223

CITATIONS READS

6 1,460

4 authors:

Edgar A. Correia Mick Cooper

ISPA Instituto Universitário University of Roehampton
30 PUBLICATIONS   95 CITATIONS    233 PUBLICATIONS   2,431 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Lucia Berdondini Karla Correia

University of East London
11 PUBLICATIONS   31 CITATIONS   
32 PUBLICATIONS   364 CITATIONS   
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Qualitative research View project

Relational depth View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Edgar A. Correia on 04 July 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

653223
research-article2016
JHPXXX10.1177/0022167816653223Journal of Humanistic PsychologyCorreia et al.

Article
Journal of Humanistic Psychology
1­–25
Existential © The Author(s) 2016
Reprints and permissions:
Psychotherapies: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0022167816653223
Similarities and jhp.sagepub.com

Differences Among the

Main Branches

Edgar A. Correia1, Mick Cooper2,

Lucia Berdondini1, and Karla Correia3

Abstract
Authors agree that a range of different existential therapies exist. However,
not much has been written about what is characteristic and distinctive of
each existential therapy, and the few claims that have been made are mainly
hypothetical. Practitioners from the four main branches of existential therapy
were asked about the authors and texts that have most influenced their
practice and the practices they considered most characteristic of existential
therapy. From all over the world, 29 daseinsanalysts, 82 existential-
humanistic, 573 existential-phenomenological, and 303 logotherapy and/or
existential analysis practitioners participated in this study. Data show that
the scope of influence of an author is pretty much limited to the branch he
or she is related to and only a few authors, in particular Frankl and Yalom,
influence practitioners from all four branches. Five categories of practice are
shared among the main existential branches as the most characteristics of
existential therapy, with phenomenological practices being the most shared
category: But the frequency of each of these categories of practice differs
significantly depending on respondents’ training or affiliated branch. Data

1University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK

2University of Roehampton, London, UK
3University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal

Corresponding Author:
Edgar A. Correia, Rua de Cabo Verde, nº 10 2º Dto., 1170-067, Lisbon, Portugal.
Email: [email protected]

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com by guest on July 2, 2016

2 Journal of Humanistic Psychology 

corroborate the idea of different existential therapies, with logotherapy and/

or existential analysis being the most markedly different branch of them all.

Keywords
existential therapy, existential psychotherapies, logotherapy, daseinsanalysis,
existential-humanistic, existential-phenomenological

Among existential psychotherapists, we find a general consensus that “there

is really no one existential therapy” (Basescu, 1963, p. 588): rather, there are
several distinct forms (Barnett & Madison, 2012; Besora, 1994; Burston,
2003; Cooper, 2003, 2012; E. Craig, 2008; M. Craig, Vos, Cooper, & Correia,
2016; Deurzen & Adams, 2011; Halling & Nill, 1995; Hoffman, 2007;
Jacobsen, 2007; Mahrer, 1996; Norcross, 1987; Owen, 1994; Schneider &
Krug, 2010; Teixeira, 2006; Walsh & McElwain, 2002; Yalom, 1980). This is
due to a range of factors, including the diversity of existential philosophies in
which it is theoretically based, the lack of any single founder of the existen-
tial schools (Besora, 1994; Cooper, 2003; Halling & Nill, 1995), and geo-
graphic and/or linguistic differences (Besora, 1994; E. Craig, 2008; Jacobsen,
2007).
Since the First World Congress for Existential Therapy, in May 2015, an
e-mail debate has been ongoing between existential therapists from all over
the world, to try to find a shared encompassing definition for existential ther-
apy (Groth, 2015). Despite the efforts of several participants, arriving to a
unifying understanding between different existential therapies has been a
challenging task (Groth, 2015).
To set the basis for a global definition of existential therapy, there is a need
to clarify the differences and similarities across its different branches.
However, there is little consensus on what separates and unifies the main
existential therapies, and no empirical research has been conducted on this
matter. The aim of this article, therefore, is to empirically explore similarities
and differences across the branches.

Which Are the Main Existential Therapies?

Excluding Erik Craig (2008), most authors have presented a similar taxon-
omy of the existential field. Daseinsanalysis is, consensually, agreed to be
one of the branches of the existential approach. Logotherapy, existential-
humanistic, and the British school of existential analysis are typically identi-
fied as three further branches of the existential field (Barnett & Madison,

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com by guest on July 2, 2016

Correia et al. 3

2012; Cooper, 2003, 2012; Cooper, Vos, & Craig, 2011; M. Craig et al., 2016;
Deurzen & Adams, 2011; Jacobsen, 2007). As the British school refers to a
single country, some authors refer to it as part of the existential-phenomeno-
logical branch (Correia, Cooper, & Berdondini, 2014; M. Craig et al., 2016;
Deurzen & Adams, 2011): This is a broader concept that encompasses several
schools and societies worldwide (Correia et al., 2014), which stands at the
same conceptual and international level as the daseinsanalysis, logotherapy,
and existential-humanistic concepts.
Several other schools of existential therapy are proposed by different
authors: for instance, existential psychoanalysis (Besora, 1994), focusing
(Barnett & Madison, 2012), cognitive-existential, and supportive-expressive
therapy (Cooper et al., 2011). However, none of these proposals are sup-
ported by more than one author.

What Differentiates the Main Existential

Therapies?
Only a few authors (Besora, 1994; Cooper, 2003, 2012; E. Craig, 2008; M.
Craig et al., 2016; Norcross, 1987) compare the differences of the main exis-
tential schools.
Both Besora (1994) and E. Craig (2008) describe daseinsanalysis as phe-
nomenological and obedient to European Continental philosophers, mainly
Heidegger: It is concerned with the shared constitutional characteristics of
human beings, rather than with the everyday phenomenal experience of the
single client (E. Craig, 2008). Clients’ problems are understood within a his-
torical dimension, and analysis of existence is made from an existential-her-
meneutic stance (Besora, 1994). Cooper (2003, 2012) argues that
daseinsanalysis is a more descriptive, psychological, and individualizing
approach, as compared with other existential therapies. He also suggests that
it has a greater emphasis on viewing clients’ difficulties from a pathologizing
perspective. Norcross (1987), based on a self-report questionnaire of thera-
peutic practices from 11 existential therapists associated to the daseinsana-
lytic approach, reported a greater use of psychoanalytic techniques, when
compared with the 22 existential-humanistic therapists that were part of his
sample. Binswanger and Boss are frequently cited as daseinsanalysis’ main
influential authors (Besora, 1994; Cooper, 2003, 2012; Jacobsen, 2007).
The existential-humanistic approach, on the other hand, is seen as a more
pragmatic and experiential existential therapy, mainly concerned with the
ontic aspects and meanings of everyday life, as presented and lived by a par-
ticular client (E. Craig, 2008). In other words, it is seen as a therapy that

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com by guest on July 2, 2016

4 Journal of Humanistic Psychology 

focuses on the phenomenal experience of the here-and-now, and ignores the

historical dimension of existence (Besora, 1994). It aims toward a personal
growth, or transcendence, and Besora (1994) argues that it denies the human
condition of facticity. Cooper (2003, 2012) describes it as an existential
school that is interpretative (trying to identify underlying meanings), psycho-
logical (focus on emotional, cognitive, and behavioral processes), individual-
ized (focus on client’s particular psychological process), and focusing on
intrapersonal processes (problem emerges from client’s psyche). Norcross
(1987) reported a greater use of physical contact and Rogerian skills, when
compared with their daseinsanalyst counterparts. The main influential authors
are identified as May, Yalom, Bugental (Besora, 1994; Cooper, 2003, 2012;
M. Craig et al., 2016), and Schneider (Cooper, 2003; M. Craig et al., 2016).
Both Cooper (2003, 2012) and Craig et al. (2016) describe the British
school as having a focus on the client’s relation to their world (interworldly).
Its practice is based on a nonpathologizing, nondirective, spontaneous (non–
technique-based), and descriptive perspective. Depending on the author
influencing the practice, British existential practitioners will tend to be more
phenomenologically (Spinelli) or philosophically oriented (van Deurzen) and
work, or not, with the immediate therapeutic relation (Cooper, 2003, 2012;
M. Craig et al., 2016). Laing, van Deurzen, Spinelli, and Cohn are identified
as the key authors in this approach (Cooper, 2003, 2012).
Logotherapy is described by both Cooper (2003, 2012) and M. Craig and
Colleagues (2016) as a more directive and technique-based practice, which
does not place a strong emphasis on the therapeutic relation and will encour-
age clients to find meaning for their lives from an intersubjective perspective.
Frankl and Längle are considered its most influential authors (Cooper, 2012;
M. Craig et al., 2016).
These existential schools are geographically and idiomatically differently
distributed worldwide (Correia et al., 2014), justifying some authors’ differ-
entiation of the several existential schools based on geographic and/or lin-
guistic differences (see Besora, 1994; E. Craig, 2008; Jacobsen, 2007).

What Brings the Main Existential Therapies

Together?
Despite the above differences, several authors refer to a few common features
that bring together all existential branches. This includes a focus on the actual
personal experience of clients (Cooper, 2003, 2012; Cooper et al., 2011; E.
Craig, 2008; Jacobsen, 2007), and using the phenomenological method of
enquiry (Barnett & Madison, 2012; Besora, 1994; E. Craig, 2008; Jacobsen,

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com by guest on July 2, 2016

Correia et al. 5

2007), while paying attention to an ontic-ontological analysis of clients’ way

of being-in-the-world (Barnett & Madison, 2012; Besora, 1994; Cooper
et al., 2011; E. Craig, 2008; Jacobsen, 2007). There is also a shared basis on
existential-philosophical assumptions (Besora, 1994; Cooper, 2003, 2012;
Cooper et al., 2011) and aiming for a more open and authentic relation with
the world (Cooper, 2003, 2012; E. Craig, 2008; Jacobsen, 2007).

Required Research
From this literature review, it is evident that authors agree that a range of dif-
ferent existential therapies exist. However, little has been published concern-
ing what is characteristic and distinctive of each existential therapy, and the
few claims that have been made are mainly hypothetical, based on each
branch’s main theoretical constructs or assumptions. Norcross’s study (1987)
is the single exception of an empirical approach to the differences between
branches, but 28 years have passed, and his sample was small and limited to
a single country and two single branches.
The present article aims to overcome this gap by looking at the practices
of existential therapists from different branches around the globe, and the
authors and texts that have most influenced those practices. It considers both
the degree to which these branches are different and the specific differences
and similarities between them.

Method
Design
A survey study was developed, with data collected through an online ques-
tionnaire, built according to Dillman and colleagues’ methodology (Dillman,
Smyth, & Christian, 2009; Millar & Dillman, 2011), to compare different
existential practitioners’ influences and practices. The survey application
took place between March 5 and July 20, 2012.

Participants
A total of 1,382 participants from all over the world accessed the question-
naire, and 1,358 gave their informed consent. There were 1,264 practitioners
who considered their therapeutic practice as existential or primarily informed
by existential ideas and practices, participants who didn’t fall into one of
these two categories were excluded. It was not possible to attribute a branch
to 255 participants, due to lack of information about their training

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com by guest on July 2, 2016

6 Journal of Humanistic Psychology 

Table 1.  Frequencies and Percentages of Participants by Branch.

Branch Frequency; n %
Daseinsanalysis 29 2.9
Existential-humanistic 82 8.1
Existential-phenomenological 573 56.8
Logotherapy and/or existential 303  30
analysis
Other 22 2.2
Total 1,009 100

and affiliated institution, and these were also excluded from this study. It was
possible to analyze the branches of the remaining 1,009 respondents, and this
was considered the valid sample for the present article.
Respondents were from 46 different countries, from all inhabited conti-
nents, but mainly from Europe (54.4%) and Latin-America (26%). The
United Kingdom (n = 212, 21%) was the most participative country, followed
by Austria (n = 147, 14.6%), Brazil (n = 144, 14.3%), Australia (n = 68,
6.7%), the United States (n = 68, 6.7%), and Mexico (n = 56, 5.6%)—for
demographics and other participant characteristics’ details, see Correia and
colleagues (2014).
More than half of this sample (n = 573, 56.8%) were trained and/or affili-
ated to existential-phenomenological institutions (see Table 1). Logotherapy
and/or existential analysis contributed with 303 respondents (30%), existen-
tial-humanistic with 82 (8.1%), daseinsanalysis with 29 (2.9%), and 22
(2.2%) participants were trained or affiliated within other psychotherapeutic
paradigms (e.g., gestalt, psychoanalytic, person-centered, etc.), but they still
considered their practice as existential or primarily informed by existential
ideas or practices.

Procedures
Sampling Procedures.  Following the results from the literature review, it was
decided to direct this survey only to the most common and consensual four
branches of existential psychotherapy: daseinsanalysis, logotherapy, existential-
humanistic, and the British school of existential analysis. But, to comprise the
wider international reality, the British school was included in its umbrella
branch: the existential-phenomenological. For the same reason, to accommo-
date Längle’s new developments on Frankl’s logotherapy, the term existential
analysis was added to the logotherapy branch. In summary, this worldwide

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com by guest on July 2, 2016

Correia et al. 7

survey bases its search and analysis of participants from the following branch
division and terminology: daseinsanalysis, the existential-humanistic
approach, the existential-phenomenological approach, and logotherapy and/or
existential analysis.
Following an Internet search, 572 counselors or psychotherapists were
invited directly to participate. From a previous systematic online search of
existential institutions across the globe (Correia et al., 2014), 40 existential
therapy institutions were contacted, and each agreed to cooperate by sending
invitations to their members. It was not possible to accurately calculate the
survey response rate, as 14 (35%) institutions did not provide information
about the number of members that they had forwarded invitations to.

Instruments. The questionnaire was available in three different languages

(English, Portuguese, and Spanish). Existential therapists (counsellors and
psychotherapists) from all over the world were sent an invitation e-mail,
wherein a link directed the interested participant directly to the online
survey.
Three list-style, open-ended questions asked participants to name their
most influential existential therapy authors and texts and which specific ther-
apeutic methods or practices they consider most characteristic of existential
therapy.
The question about authors was “As an existential/existentially-informed
counsellor or psychotherapist, which three authors on existential therapy
have most influenced your practice?”, and participants were asked to com-
plete up to three open-ended answer boxes labelled: “Author 1,” “Author 2,”
and “Author 3.” The question about texts asked “As an existential/existen-
tially-informed counsellor or psychotherapist, which three specific texts
(book, book chapter, or journal article) on existential therapy have most
influenced your practice?”, and participants were invited to complete up to
three pairs of open-ended answer boxes, labelled “Author 1/Text 1,” “Author
2/Text 2,” “Author3/Text 3.” The question about practices was “As an exis-
tential/existentially-informed counsellor or psychotherapist, which three
specific therapeutic methods or practices would you consider most charac-
teristic of existential therapy?”, and participants were asked to complete up
to three open-ended answer boxes labelled: “Practice 1,” “Practice 2,” and
“Practice 3.”
These questions were part of a larger survey and were, respectively, num-
ber seven, nine, and eight of a 10-item questionnaire, designed to study the
practices, influences, and characteristics of existential counsellors and psy-
chotherapists around the globe (see Correia et al., 2014; Correia, Cooper, &
Berdondini, 2015; Correia, Cooper, Berdondini, & Correia, 2016).

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com by guest on July 2, 2016

8 Journal of Humanistic Psychology 

Analysis.  Participants’ branches were identified based on their training and

affiliation institutions (Questions 2a and 5a, respectively): They were attrib-
uted to the branch of their training and affiliation institutions. Whenever
these branches did not match, prevalence was given to the societies the par-
ticipants were affiliated to. The branches of existential institutions were
identified, initially, by the name (e.g., the “Instituto Peruano de Logoterapia,
Viktor Frankl”). Whenever this was not self-evident, an e-mail was sent to
the institution to clarify their branch (29 e-mails were sent to clarify this
information). For the 14 institutions that did not respond, a careful reading
of their website was made to identify their branch. A total of 128 existential
therapy institutions and their respective branches were identified (see Cor-
reia et al., 2014).
Participants’ responses to authors and texts questions were written in dif-
ferent languages and in many different ways. To enable statistical analysis,
responses were normalized and codified into numeric codes. As the questions
specifically ask for authors and texts from existential therapy, all existential
philosophy or other nontherapy responses were excluded from the present
analysis.
Responses to the question about the most characteristic existential prac-
tices were analyzed and codified using content analysis. Elo and Kyngäs’
(2008) methodology was used, following the principles of an inductive (data-
driven) analysis approach (Elo & Kyngäs, 2008). The analysis was performed
independently by two analysts (1st and 4th author) and two reviewers (2nd
and 3rd author): One analyst and one reviewer are existential therapists,
while the other is from another therapeutic paradigm (for detailed analysis
procedure, see Correia et al., 2016).
A total of 88 different practices (the code level) were identified and then
clustered into 20 subcategories and 7 overarching categories of practice. For
this article, the analysis was focus on the categories and main subcategories
of practice chosen by participants of each branch. Some responses were too
general (e.g., “Daseinsanalysis” or “Logotherapy”) or nonspecific (e.g.,
“therapeutic” or “transcendentalism”) to tell us of a concrete therapeutic
practice. These responses were grouped into two overarching categories:
Generic reference to existential or humanistic psychotherapy models and
Nonspecific, respectively, and will not be considered for statistical analysis.
Responses were downloaded from the online platform to an SPSS data-
base, where data codification and statistical descriptive and inferential analy-
sis were conducted.
A chi-square test was performed over the different thematized answers
given by participants to determine if practitioners’ responses to most charac-
teristic practices were homogeneous among different branches. To clarify

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com by guest on July 2, 2016

Correia et al. 9

and quantify the differences, a logistic regression analysis was conducted. To

perform this probabilistic statistical model, participant answers (dependent
variable) were transformed into binary variables. Logistic regression does not
consider how many times a practitioner referred to a certain practice, but only
if he or she referred or not (one yes or one no) to that category of practice. As
some participants gave more than one answer concerning the same category
of practice, some accuracy may have been lost in this attempt to quantify and
determine the specific differences among branches.

Results
Most Influential Authors
Daseinsanalytic participants gave 46 valid responses, citing 17 different
authors to the most influential author’s question. Boss was their most fre-
quent response (n = 19, 41.3% of responses from daseinanalysts, see Table 2).
Binswanger was the second most common choice (n = 7, 15.2%), followed
by the Brazilian daseinsanalyst Spanoudis (n = 4, 8.7%). An existential-
humanistic (May) and an existential-phenomenological (Spinelli) associated
author were both chosen twice (4.3%). Frankl was chosen a single time
(2.2%), the only logotherapist cited by the daseinsanalysts.
Participants associated with the existential-humanistic branch gave 194
valid choices and 34 different influential authors. Yalom (n = 31, 16%) was
their most influential (see Table 2), followed by May (n = 28, 14.4%) and
Frankl (n = 19, 9.8%). Frankl was the sole logotherapy author considered
influential by the existential-humanistic sample. Spinelli (n = 13, 6.7%) and
van Deurzen (n = 8, 4.1%), both existential-phenomenological associated
authors, were considered the 6th and 7th most influential, and Boss, a dasein-
sanalytic author, was the 11th most influential (n = 6, 3.1%) to their therapeu-
tic practice.
Spinelli was the most influential author for the existential-phenomenological
sample (see Table 2), with 215 (19.3%) of the 1,113 validated responses. This
was followed very closely by Yalom (n = 213, 19.1%), and then van Deurzen
(n = 198, 17.8%). Frankl came next (n = 73, 6.6%), with less than half the fre-
quency of van Deurzen, and was the only logotherapy author considered influ-
ential among the 75 different authors named by the existential-phenomenological
associated participants. Their most influential daseinsanalyst author was Boss,
the 9th most influential (n = 18, 1.6%).
Within the 63 different influential authors chosen by the logotherapy and/
or existential analysis participants, Frankl (n = 267, 35.7%) and Längle (n =
203, 27.1%) add up to 62.8% (see Table 2) of the 748 validated answers.

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com by guest on July 2, 2016

10 Journal of Humanistic Psychology 

Table 2.  Frequencies and Percentages of the Five Most Influential Authors by
Branch.

Branch Authors Frequency; n %

Daseinsanalysis Boss, M. 19 41.3
Binswanger, L. 7 15.2
Spanoudis, S. 4 8.7
May, R. 2 4.3
Spinelli, E. 2 4.3
Existential- Yalom, I. 31 16
humanistic May, R. 28 14.4
Frankl, V. 19 9.8
Bugental, J. 18 9.3
Schneider, K. 14 7.2
Existential- Spinelli, E. 215 19.3
phenomenological Yalom, I. 213 19.1
van Deurzen, E. 198 17.8
Frankl, V. 73 6.6
May, R. 70 6.3
Logotherapy Frankl, V. 267 35.7
Längle, A. 203 27.1
Yalom, I. 76 10.2
Lukas, E. 46 6.1
Tutsch, L. 14 1.9

Yalom (n = 76, 10.2%) was their 3rd most influential author. The existential-
phenomenological author most influential to logotherapy participants’ prac-
tice was van Deurzen, the 7th of their rank (n = 8, 1.1%). Binswanger, the
10th (n = 6, 0.8%), was the most influential from the daseinsanalytic branch.
The large number of different authors, and the visible differences among
branches made inductive statistics not viable to compare existential thera-
pies’ differences for this question.

Most Influential Texts

Participants associated to the daseinsanalytic branch gave 48 valid responses
to the question of the most influential text, the most common being Boss’s
Existential Foundation of Medicine and Psychology (n = 9, 18.8%), cited
almost twice more than Heidegger’s Zollikon Seminars (n = 5, 10.4%). Three
books came third (n = 4, 8.3%), one from Binswanger and two from Boss (see

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com by guest on July 2, 2016

Correia et al. 11

Table 3.  Frequencies and Percentages of the Five Most Influential Texts by
Branch.

Branch Texts n %
Daseinsanalysis Boss, M., Existential Foundation of Medicine 9 18.8
and Psychology
Heidegger, M., Zollikon Seminars 5 10.4
Binswanger, L., Grundformen und erkenntnis 4 8.3
menschlichen daseins
Boss, M., Lebensangst, schuldgefühle und 4 8.3
psychotherapeutische befreiung
Boss, M., Psychoanalysis and Daseinsanalysis 4 8.3
Existential- Frankl, V., Man’s Search for Meaning 16 9.4
humanistic Yalom, I., Existential Psychotherapy 15 8.8
Bugental, J., Psychotherapy Isn’t What You 8 4.7
Think
Schneider, K., Existential-Integrative 8 4.7
Psychotherapy
Yalom, I., The Gift of Therapy 6 3.5
Existential- Yalom, I., Existential psychotherapy 108 11.4
phenomenological van Deurzen, E., Everyday mysteries 60 6.4
Spinelli, E., Practising Existential 58 6.1
Psychotherapy
van Deurzen, E., Existential Counselling & 56 5.9
Psychotherapy in practice
Spinelli, E., The Interpreted World 47 5
Logotherapy Frankl, V., Man’s Search for Meaning 104 18.1
Frankl, V., The Doctor and the Soul 59 10.3
Längle, A., Sinnvoll Leben 36 6.3
Yalom, I., Existential Psychotherapy 33 5.7
Längle, A., Lehrbuch zur existenzanalyse 26 4.5

Table 3). The five most influential texts (n = 26, 54.2%) are all associated to
the daseinsanalytic branch. No logotherapy text was found among their 23
different choices, and 2 books from the British school were chosen once.
Practitioners associated to the existential humanistic branch gave 171
validated answers and 67 different texts. Frankl’s Man’s search for meaning
(n = 16, 9.4%) and Yalom’s Existential Psychotherapy (n = 15, 8.8%) were
their most influential texts (see Table 3). Bugental’s Psychotherapy Isn’t
What You Think and Schneider’s Existential-Integrative Psychotherapy came
third, both representing 4.7% of existential-humanistic responses (n = 8).

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com by guest on July 2, 2016

12 Journal of Humanistic Psychology 

With the exception of Frankl’s Man’s Search for Meaning, the eight most
influential texts are all from the United States (n = 52, 30.4%). Frankl’s text
was also an exception of logotherapy’s influence among existential-humanistic
participants, as only one other Frankl text (The Doctor and the Soul) was
chosen a single time (0.6%).
Existential-phenomenological participants gave 185 different texts in 944
validated answers. Yalom’s Existential Psychotherapy (n = 108, 11.4%) was
their most influential text. van Deurzen’s Everyday Mysteries (n = 60, 6.4%)
and Spinelli’s Practising Existential Psychotherapy (n = 58, 6.1%) came sec-
ond and third, respectively (see Table 3). Frankl’s Man’s Search for Meaning
was their 6th most influential text (n = 45, 4.8%), but the next logotherapy
text, Frankl’s The Doctor and the Soul, appears as the 42nd most influential
text (n = 3, 0.3%). Zollikon Seminars, the 26th most influential (n = 6, 0.6%),
was the daseinsanalytic associated book that most influenced the practice of
existential-phenomenological practitioners.
Participants associated to the logotherapy and/or existential analysis
branch gave 574 validated responses and 128 different texts. Two of Frankl’s
books were their most influential texts: Man’s Search for Meaning (n = 104,
18.1%) and The Doctor and the Soul (n = 59, 10.3%). Längle’s Sinnvoll
Leben (n = 36, 6.3%) was their third most influential text (see Table 3). With
the exception of Yalom’s Existential Psychotherapy (n = 33, 5.7%), the 11
most influential texts are all from Frankl and Längle (n = 311, 54.2%), two
logotherapy and/or existential analysis associated authors. The most influen-
tial existential-phenomenological associated text was van Deurzen’s
Existential Counselling & Psychotherapy in Practice, ranking the 23rd most
influential (n = 3, 0.5%), while a single daseinsanalytic text was considered
influential by a single participant (n = 1, 0.2%): Binswanger’s Trois formes
manquées de la présence humaine.
For the texts question, inferential analysis was again not possible due to
the large number of different texts and the visible differences among branches.

Most Characteristic Practices

Participants associated to the daseinsanalytic branch gave 34 considered
responses. Phenomenological practices (see Table 4) was the most frequent
category (n = 16, 47.1%) in daseinsanalysts’ answers to existential therapy’s
most characteristic practices: in particular, the use of the Phenomenological
method of enquiry (n = 9, 26.5%) and Hermeneutic based practices (n = 6,
17.6%). With less than half as many citations, Practices informed by existen-
tial assumptions (n = 7, 20.6%) was their second most popular category of
practice, referring to either the exploration of clients’ relation with the

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com by guest on July 2, 2016

 Table 4.  Frequencies and Percentages of the Categories and Subcategories of Practice by Branch.
Practices: Categories and subcategories Daseins; n (%) Exist-hum; n (%) Exist-phen; n (%) Logo; n (%)

Phenomenological practices 16 (47.1) 31 (19.3) 475 (36.1) 73 (11.2)

  Phenomenological method 9 (26.5) 23 (14.3) 370 (28.1) 62 (9.5)
  Phenomenology based attitudes and practices 1 (2.9) 8 (5) 78 (5.9) 10 (1.5)
  Hermeneutic based practices 6 (17.6) — 27 (2.1) 1 (0.2)
Practices informed by existential assumptions 7 (20.6) 42 (26.1) 389 (29.6) 37 (5.7)
  Addressing the existential givens 3 (8.8) 24 (14.9) 213 (16.2) 19 (2.9)
  Addressing other existential assumptions 4 (11.8) 17 (10.6) 157 (11.9) 16 (2.5)
  Philosophical practices — 1 (0.6) 19 (1.4) 2 (0.3)
Relational practices 6 (17.6) 48 (29.8) 287 (21.8) 42 (6.4)
  Relational stance 3 (8.8) 24 (14.9) 147 (11.2) 19 (2.9)
  Addressing what is happening on the therapeutic relation — 13 (8.1) 71 (5.4) 5 (0.8)
  Person-centered related attitudes 2 (5.9) 9 (5.6) 20 (1.5) 9 (1.4)
  Relational skills 1 (2.9) 2 (1.2) 49 (3.7) 9 (1.4)
Methods associated with specific existential branches 1 (2.9) 8 (5) 55 (4.2) 475 (72.9)

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com by guest on July 2, 2016

  Logotherapy and existential analysis methods 1 (2.9) 7 (4.3) 36 (2.7) 474 (72.7)
  Sartrean-based therapy methods — 1 (0.6) 19 (1.4) 1 (0.2)
Practices of other therapeutic paradigms 4 (11.8) 32 (19.9) 109 (8.3) 25 (3.8)
  Experiential and body practices 2 (5.9) 18 (11.2) 42 (3.2) 4 (0.6)
  Deepening awareness — 9 (5.6) 21 (1.6) 5 (0.8)
  Communicational practices — 2 (1.2) 26 (2) 2 (0.3)
  Other 2 (5.9) 1 (0.6) 11 (0.8) 6 (0.9)
  Directive interventions — 2 (1.2) 9 (0.7) 8 (1.2)

13
Note. Daseins = Daseinsanalysis, Exist-hum = Existential-humanistic, Exist-phen = Existential-phenomenological, Logo = Logotherapy and/or existential analysis. Bold data
refer to the most frequent category and subcategory of practice by branch.
14 Journal of Humanistic Psychology 

existential givens (n = 3, 8.8%) or Addressing other existential assumptions

(n = 4, 11.8%) in therapy, such as “Detecting the ontological” P.796
(Participant number: P.796). The Relational practices category comprised
17.6% (n = 6) of daseinsanalysts’ responses, in particular the importance of
adopting a Relational stance (n = 3, 8.8%) or Person-centered related atti-
tudes, like Empathy (n = 2, 5.9%). The use of methods associated to other
therapeutic paradigms represented 11.8% (n = 4) and a single participant
(2.9%) referred to the search for the meaning of life, an intervention associ-
ated logotherapy.
The existential-humanistic sample gave 161 coded practices considered
for statistical analysis. Relational practices (see Table 4) was their most
frequent category (n = 48, 29.8%), in particular the importance of a rela-
tional stance (n = 24, 14.9%). Within the relational practices, “Identifying
here and now windows for open dialog” P.1054 (Participant number:
P.1054), that is, Working in the here-and-now, was their most frequent code
of response (n = 12, 7.5%). Practices informed by existential assumptions
was their second most frequent category (n = 42, 26.1%), particularly for
Addressing the existential givens (n = 24, 14.9%), especially Freedom/
choice/responsibility. The use of practices or methods usually related with
other therapeutic paradigms was existential-humanistic’s third most impor-
tant category of practice (n = 32, 19.9%), and within this category,
Experiential and body practices was the most frequent subcategory (n = 18,
11.2%). Only then came the phenomenological practices category (n = 31,
19.3%), mainly the use of the phenomenological method (n = 23, 14.3%).
No references were made to hermeneutics. The use of Methods associated
with specific existential branches represent no more than 5% (n = 8) of
existential-humanistic responses.
Existential-phenomenological associated participants gave 1,315 con-
sidered answers. The phenomenological practices’ category was the most
frequent among existential-phenomenological participants (n = 475,
36.1%), mainly through references to the use of “The phenomenological
questioning method” P.748 (Participant number: P.748)(n = 370, 28.1%):
see the Phenomenological method subcategory (Table 4). Practices
informed by existential assumptions was their second most frequent cate-
gory (n = 389, 29.6%), and addressing the existential givens (n = 213,
16.2%), in particular Freedom/choice/responsibility (n = 53, 4%), was
more frequent than addressing other existential assumptions (n = 157,
11.9%), like Exploring/understanding client’s worldview (n = 44, 3.3%).
Relational practices were existential-phenomenological participants’ third
most frequent category (n = 287, 21.8%), and relevance was given to adopt-
ing a relational stance (n = 147, 11.2%). Practices of other therapeutic

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com by guest on July 2, 2016

Correia et al. 15

paradigms represented 8.3% (n = 109)—in particular experiential and body

practices (n = 42, 3.2%)—and methods associated with specific existential
schools comprised 4.2% (n = 55) of their coded responses.
Logotherapy and/or existential analysis associated participants gave 652
responses validated for statistical analysis. Methods associated with classic
logotherapy, and Längle’s existential analysis, were considered the most
characteristic methods of existential therapy (n = 474, 72.7%), according to
participants from this particular branch (see Logotherapy and existential
analysis methods subcategory, Table 4). Within their 14 most frequent codes
of practice, all were specific logotherapy or existential analysis methods—
e.g., Personal existential analysis method (n = 147, 22.5%), Paradoxical
intention (n = 59, 9%), Dereflexion (n = 41, 6.3%), Personal position finding
method (n = 36, 5.5%), and Addressing the four fundamental motivations
(n = 36, 5.5%)—with the single exception for the application of the phenom-
enological method, which was their third most characteristic specific prac-
tice (n = 58, 8.9%). Phenomenological practices, their second most frequent
category, represented no more than 11.2% (n = 73) and the third category,
relational practices, 6.4% (n = 42). The practices informed by existential
assumptions were referred to 37 times (5.7%), and the use of techniques
from other nonexistential psychotherapeutic paradigms represented 3.8% (n
= 25).

Inferential Statistics
Chi-square test applied to the thematized answers. A chi-square test of
homogeneity was conducted to determine whether participants’ understand-
ing of existential therapy’s most characteristic practices are equally dis-
tributed among branches. Results show that the frequency of the chosen
categories differed significantly depending on the participant’s branch χ2(12,
n = 2,162) = 1,198.522, p < .001.

Logistic regression applied to the participants’ dichotomized answers. To

determine and quantify the differences between branches, logistic regression
analyses were conducted. This predicts the likelihood (odds ratio) of a prac-
titioner of a certain branch choosing one of the categories of practice (as the
most characteristic of existential therapy), when compared with a practitioner
from another branch (reference category).
The model’s chi-square statistics confirm that the independent variables
(branches), as a whole, significantly affect each of the dichotomized depen-
dent variables (thematized practice): Phenomenological practices, χ2(3) =
150.646, p < .001; practices informed by existential assumptions, χ2(3) =
128.106, p < .001; relational practices, χ2(3) = 82.336, p < .001; methods

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com by guest on July 2, 2016

16 Journal of Humanistic Psychology 

associated with specific existential branches, χ2(3) = 461.745, p < .001; prac-
tices of other therapeutic paradigms, χ2(3) = 25.504, p < .001.
The adjusted models show that a daseinsanalyst (see Table 5) is almost
three times more likely to choose a phenomenological practice (odds ratio
[OR] = 2.763, Wald’s χ2(1) = 4.335, p = .037), as the most characteristic of
existential therapy, than an existential-humanistic (reference category), but
70% less likely to choose a practice informed by existential assumptions
(OR = 0.299, Wald’s χ2(1) = 4.080, p = .043). Compared with an existential-
phenomenological therapist, a daseinsanalyst is 75.6% less likely to choose a
practice informed by existential assumptions (OR = 0.244, Wald’s χ2(1) =
6.47, p = .011) and 70.6% less likely to choose a relational practice (OR =
0.294, Wald’s χ2(1) = 4.811, p = .028). Compared with a logotherapist, the
odds of a daseinsanalyst choosing a phenomenological practice will be 3.6
times bigger (OR = 3.671, Wald’s χ2(1) = 8.59, p = .003), but only one das-
einsanalyst chose a method associated with specific existential branches.
The odds of an existential-humanistic choosing a practice from another
therapeutic paradigm as the most characteristic of the existential practice is
two times bigger (OR = 2.056, Wald’s χ2(1) = 6.963, p = .008) than that of an
existential-phenomenological practitioner (see Table 5). But the latter is
almost five times more likely to choose a phenomenological practice (OR =
4.968, Wald’s χ2(1) = 36.232, p < .001) when compared to the former. Except
for phenomenological practices, existential-humanist and logotherapist odds
ratios are significantly different for all thematized practices: The odds of
choosing relational practices and practices related to other therapeutic para-
digms are almost five times bigger for an existential humanistic (OR = 4.925,
Wald’s χ2(1) = 27.573, p < .001, and OR = 4.849, Wald’s χ2(1) = 22.874, p <
.001, respectively) and 7.2 times bigger for practices informed by existential
assumptions (OR = 7.26, Wald’s χ2(1) = 38.271, p < .001). On the other hand,
logotherapists are 43 times more likely to choose their own specific methods
(OR = 43.47, Wald’s χ2(1) = 84.532, p < .001).
The existential-phenomenological odds ratio of choosing existential ther-
apy’s most characteristic practices is significantly different for all categories
of practice, when compared with a logotherapy and/or existential analysis
practitioner (see Table 5): The existential-phenomenological practitioner will
be 2.3 times more likely to choose a practice of another therapeutic paradigm
(OR = 2.358, Wald’s χ2(1) = 6.963, p = .008), 5.2 times more likely to choose
a relational practice (OR = 5.284, Wald’s χ2(1) = 61.646, p < .001), 6.6 times
more likely to choose a phenomenological practice (OR = 6.601, Wald’s χ2(1)
= 120.482, p < .001), and almost 9 times more likely to refer to practices
informed by existential assumptions (OR = 8.905, Wald’s χ2(1) = 85.623, p <
.001). Moreover, the odds of choosing a method associated with specific

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com by guest on July 2, 2016

 Table 5.  Odds Ratios, and Corresponding Confidence Intervals, of Choosing a Category of Practice Compared With the
Reference Category.
Daseins Exist-hum Exist-phen Logo
Reference
category Category of practice OR (95% CI) OR (95% CI) OR (95% CI) OR (95% CI)

Exist-hum Phenomenological practices 2.763* (1.061, 7.190) — 4.968*** (2.948, 8.373) 0.753 (0.431, 1.316)
Existential assumptions 0.299* (0.093, 0.965) — 1.227 (0.750, 2.007) 0.138*** (0.074, 0.258)
Relational practices 0.316 (0.098, 1.021) — 1.073 (0.654, 1.761) 0.203*** (0.112, 0.368)
Specific existential branches 0.381 (0.045, 3.216) — 0.943 (0.428, 2.077) 43.470*** (19.452, 97.144)
From other paradigms 0.319 (0.086, 1.178) — 0.486** (0.285, 0.831) 0.206*** (0.108, 0.394)
Exist-phen Phenomenological practices 0.556 (0.238, 1.297) 0.201*** (0.119, 0.339) — 0.151*** (0.108, 0.212)
Existential assumptions 0.244* (0.082, 0.726) 0.815 (0.498, 1.334) — 0.112*** (0.071, 0.178)
Relational practices 0.294* (0.099, 0.878) 0.932 (0.568, 1.530) — 0.189*** (0.125, 0.287)
Specific existential branches 0.404 (0.053, 3.059) 1.060 (0.482, 2.335) — 46.091*** (29.652, 71.645)
From other paradigms 0.655 (0.191, 2.252) 2.056** (1.204, 3.513) — 0.424** (0.261, 0.688)
Logo Phenomenological practices 3.671** (1.538, 8.758) 1.329 (0.760, 2.323) 6.601*** (4.713, 9.246) —
Existential assumptions 2.169 (0.680, 6.921) 7.260*** (3.874, 13.605) 8.905*** (5.604, 14.150) —

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com by guest on July 2, 2016

Relational practices 1.555 (0.497, 4.870) 4.925*** (2.716, 8.929) 5.284*** (3.487, 8.006) —
Specific existential branches a 0.023*** (0.10, 0.051) 0.022*** (0.014, 0.034) —
From other paradigms 1.546 (0.427, 5.597) 4.849*** (2.539, 9.261) 2.358** (1.453, 3.827) —

Note. OR = odds ratio (an OR > 1 indicates that the event of choosing that category of practice is more likely to occur in that branch when compared with the
reference category, and an OR < 1 indicates the contrary). CI = confidence interval, Daseins = Daseinsanalysis, Exist-hum = Existential-humanistic, Exist-phen =
Existential-phenomenological, Logo = Logotherapy and/or existential analysis.
aOnly one daseinsanalyst chose a method associated with specific existential branches, making impractical the adjustment of a logistic regression model.

*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

17
18 Journal of Humanistic Psychology 

existential branches is 46 times bigger (OR = 46.091, Wald’s χ2(1) = 289.714,

p < .001) for a logotherapist, when compared with an existential-phenomeno-
logical therapist.

Discussion 
Data from both self-reported influences and practices suggest differences and
some similarities among the four main existential branches. Practitioners’
most influential authors and texts are usually related to the branch of their
training or affiliation institutions. Five overarching categories of practice were
found in common but, depending on their training or affiliation branch, prac-
titioners place a different relevance on each of those characteristic practices.

Differences
Influences.  Data show that among existential therapists, the scope of influ-
ence of an author is pretty much limited to the branch he or she is related to.
This is particularly so with logotherapists, who reported being both influ-
enced mainly by its own authors and texts and having little influence (except
for Frankl) on other branches. Längle, for instance, was considered a great
influence among logotherapists’ practice but not a single reference to his
name or work was made among participants from other alignments.
These findings were consistent with the literature review about branches’
most influential authors and gives emphasis to the specificities of each branch
influence.

Practices.  Five categories of practice are shared among the main existential
branches, but the frequency with which each of those practices are consid-
ered the most characteristic of existential therapy differs significantly depend-
ing on respondents’ training or affiliated branch. Daseinsanalysis,
existential-humanistic and the existential-phenomenological understanding
of existential therapy’s most characteristic practices show significant differ-
ences with each other concerning the choice of two categories of practice (see
Table 5). Logotherapy and/or existential analysis, on the other hand, pre-
sented two or more significant and pronounced differences with all other
branches, in particular with the existential-phenomenological.
Daseinsanalysts presented a similar ranking to the existential-phenomeno-
logical participants regarding the most characteristic categories of practice
(see Table 4). Phenomenological practices were their main category of exis-
tential practice, and a particular relevance (not found with any other branch)
was given to hermeneutic interventions. Rogerian relational practices were as

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com by guest on July 2, 2016

Correia et al. 19

important to daseinsanalysts as they were to existential-humanistic, but no

mention was made of addressing what is happening in the therapeutic rela-
tion, as both the existential-humanistic and existential-phenomenological
respondents had. Not a single allusion to psychoanalytic specific techniques
was found. These findings corroborate E. Craig (2008) and Besora’s (1994)
claim of a phenomenological and hermeneutic perspective on clients’ prob-
lems, but they do not corroborate Norcross’ (1987) results of a more psycho-
analytic and less Rogerian oriented approach. In summary, daseinsanalysts
mentioned a practice based on the phenomenological method of enquiry and
on a hermeneutic-analytical stance toward clients’ problems: “The phenom-
enological analysis asks, as its natural continuity, for an Existential Analysis”
(Besora, 1994, p. 19). A good therapeutic relation, based on attitudes like
presence, was considered characteristic of an existential practice, but no rel-
evance was given to the here-and-now work within the immediate therapeu-
tic relation.
Existential-humanistics respondents gave greater emphasis to relational
over phenomenological practices and existential assumptions. They fre-
quently indicated practices from other therapeutic paradigms, in particular
experiential and body practices. Here-and-now interventions and exploring
feelings and emotions were their first and fifth most coded practices, while
not a single allusion was made to hermeneutic interventions. These results are
consistent with Besora’s (1994) and E. Craig’s (2008) statements that exis-
tential-humanistic psychotherapists are more focused on the phenomenal
experience of the here-and-now, ignoring a more historical-analytical per-
spective of clients. The relational depth of the therapeutic relation was fre-
quently present in existential-humanistic practitioners’ responses to answers
like “Presence” or “Encounter.” Existential-humanistic practitioners reported
practices that point to a more relational, phenomenal, and experiential ther-
apy than their counterparts.
Existential-phenomenological responses can corroborate some of both
Cooper’s (2003, 2012) and M. Craig et al.’s (2016) assertions about the British
school of existential analysis. The relevance attributed to both the phenome-
nological method of enquiry and to phenomenological-based attitudes and
practices can corroborate the idea of a phenomenological, descriptive, nondi-
rective, and nonpathologizing perspective (Cooper, 2003, 2012; M. Craig
et al., 2016). Both a phenomenological (Spinelli) and a philosophically (van
Deurzen) based therapy are referred to in our findings (and one kind of prac-
tice does not necessarily exclude the other, as 45.4% of participants chose both
practices simultaneously). Working in the here-and-now (work with the imme-
diate therapeutic relation) and exploring/understanding clients’ worldviews
(interworldly) were existential-phenomenological practitioners’ fifth and sixth

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com by guest on July 2, 2016

20 Journal of Humanistic Psychology 

most frequent specific practices. Existential-phenomenological data suggest a

practice based on the phenomenological method of enquiry with a focus on
helping the clients explore and/or acknowledge the impact and relation with
particular existential-philosophical assumptions/presuppositions. Instead of a
hermeneutic-analytical stance (as with daseinsanalysis), a more descriptive
and relational perspective of therapy was given.
Logotherapists had a different perspective on existential therapy’s most char-
acteristic practices (see Tables 4 and 5), corroborating the positioning of some
authors who refer to it as a more specific or distinct branch (Angerami-Camon,
2007; Besora, 1994; Cooper, 2003, 2012). Logotherapy and existential analysis’
specific methods represented 72.7% of all logotherapists’ coded practices, while
those same methods accounted for no more than 4.3% to respondents of other
existential branches. Of all the 548 responses referring to logotherapy and exis-
tential analysis methods, 474 (87.2%) were given by therapists trained and/or
affiliated to logotherapy and/or existential analysis institutions. A great empha-
sis was given to both their classical (e.g., paradoxical intention, dereflexion) and
more recent step-wise methods (e.g., personal existential analysis method, per-
sonal position finding method). In addition, relational practices represented no
more than 6.4% of their coded practices, corroborating both Cooper (2003,
2012) and M. Craig and Colleagues’ (2016) description of a more directive and
technique-based practice, with less emphasis on the therapeutic relation.
Logotherapists gave some relevance to the phenomenological method of
enquiry—and Längle (Längle, 2003, 2012, 2013) states that phenomenology
underpins all his step-wise methods—but their understanding of the existential
practice relies mainly on their own specific techniques. As relational practices,
existential assumptions were not as relevant as they are to all other branches, and
finding personal meaning was their main therapeutic goal.

Similaraties
Influences.  Frankl, May, Binswanger, Bugental, and Spinelli were the few
authors considered influential by participants of all four branches. Yalom’s
Existential psychotherapy; May, Angel, and Ellenberger’s Existence; and
Bugental’s The Art of the Psychotherapist were the only texts referred to as
influential by participants of all main branches. Data from both authors and
texts highlight Frankl and Yalom as existential therapies’ most influential
authors across all branches.

Practices. Among daseinsanalysts, existential-humanistic, and existential-

phenomenological, the significant differences on the odds for choosing three
of the five overarching categories of practice was not found (see Table 5).

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com by guest on July 2, 2016

Correia et al. 21

Despite the differences that were identified, phenomenological practice

was the most shared category among respondents from all branches, in
particular the use of the phenomenological method (focus on the phenom-
ena as it shows itself) to enquiry, question, describing, or exploring a par-
ticular subject with the client (see Table 4). This is even more evident if
one considers that almost half (n = 264, 10.8%) of the logotherapy and
existential analysis methods, cited by the logotherapists, were references
to the several step-wise (but still) phenomenological-based methods devel-
oped by Längle (2013).
Theoretical claims that phenomenology (Barnett & Madison, 2012;
Besora, 1994; E. Craig, 2008; Jacobsen, 2007) and the sharing of a few exis-
tential-philosophical assumptions (Besora, 1994; Cooper, 2003, 2012;
Cooper et al., 2011) are a common feature among existential therapies found
some empirical support here. Practitioners from all four branches referred
also to relational practices, and all of them referred to the application of sev-
eral different methods or practices, either from other therapeutic paradigms
or from specific existential schools.

Limitations
Data concern practitioners’ self-reported perceived influences and practices,
which may not represent what really influenced them and what they really
practice.
Respondents were not asked directly to which branch they identify their
existential practice. Despite the problems associated with self-reported
answers, this could have been a more accurate way of determining the partici-
pants’ branch: The fact that a participant was trained or is a member of certain
institution may not always mean that their main influences and practices rep-
resent those associated with their institutional branch. Hence, those who
responded to the questionnaire may not be representative of the existential
branch they are associated with.
The number of participants associated to the daseinsanalytic branch was
clearly low, adding some limitations on branch representativeness and statis-
tical power.

Implications for Practice and Further Research

Despite the limitations above, these data give empirical evidence about the
similarities and differences among practitioners from the four main existen-
tial branches. Data about practitioners’ self-reported most influential authors
and texts and practitioners’ perspectives on what they consider to be

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com by guest on July 2, 2016

22 Journal of Humanistic Psychology 

existential therapy’s most characteristic practices help clarify the particulari-

ties and complexity of existential psychotherapy.
Recognizing differences and similarities can be a first step toward
acknowledging and respecting what separates and what unites existential
therapies. Data seem to convey exchange difficulties, in particular, between
logotherapy and/or existential analysis and its counterparts.
Future research should focus on actual therapy sessions to verify if self-
reported differences are confirmed by different in-session practices.

Conclusion
In a previous article (Correia et al., 2014), it was shown that the four main
existential therapy branches are differently distributed worldwide, both geo-
graphically and idiomatically, depending on their country of origin and the
mother tongue of the founding or key authors: Daseinsanalysis (Binswanger
and Boss) being mainly concentrated in the German-speaking countries of
central Europe and in Brazil (Boss helped found the Brazilian group), the
existential-humanistic (May, Bugental, and Yalom) branch largely confined
to the United States recently reached China, the existential-phenomenologi-
cal branch, although a more culturally and linguistically diverse branch
(thanks to its origins—e.g., Spinelli, van Deurzen, Feijoo), has no expression
in German-speaking countries, finally Logotherapy and/or existential analy-
sis (Frankl and Längle) is mainly concentrated in German-speaking European
countries and in Spanish-speaking Latin-American countries (both Frankl
and Längle traveled frequently to teach in Latin America).
Here, strong evidence is presented corroborating differences in both self-
reported influences and practices among therapists associated with these self-
same branches.
May, Binswanger, Bugental, and Spinelli, but mainly Frankl and Yalom,
are the few shared authorial influences among the four main branches, while
the rule of each approach’s own authors as their main influences prevails.
The application of the phenomenological method is what most unifies the
different branches’ understanding about existential therapy’s most characteris-
tic practices. The relevance of existential-philosophical assumptions and the
relational attention on practice are also shared beliefs, mainly between dasein-
sanalysts, existential-phenomenological, and existential-humanistic practitio-
ners. Logotherapists’ understanding of the existential practice relies mostly on
their own very specific practices, barely referred to by their counterparts.
Logotherapy and/or existential analysis presented itself in this study as a
more idiosyncratic and technique-based existential psychotherapy; existential-
humanistic branch is characterized as a more relational, experiential, and

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com by guest on July 2, 2016

Correia et al. 23

eclectic approach according to its self-reported practices; daseinsanalysis and

the existential-phenomenological reveal themselves as closely related
branches: the first more hermeneutic-analytical, the second more relational and
descriptive.
The present study has contributed to an empirically based characterization
and understanding of existential therapies’ differences and similarities. It is
now easier “to delineate a movement which is multiple in source and influence
at the same time that it is one identifiable force” (Halling & Nill, 1995, p. 1).

Authors’ Note
This investigation was granted ethical approval, under the Counselling Unit research
projects generic ethical approval (UEC0405/38), by the University of Strathclyde eth-
ics committee.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research was supported by a schol-
arship (SFRH/BD/71484/2010) from the FCT–Fundação para a Ciência e a
Tecnologia, Ministério da Educação e Ciência, Portugal.

References
Angerami-Camon, V. A. (2007). Psicoterapia existencial [Existential psychotherapy]
(4th ed.). São Paulo, Brazil: Thomson.
Barnett, L., & Madison, G. (Eds.). (2012). Existential therapy: Legacy, vibrancy and
dialogue. London, England: Routledge.
Basescu, S. (1963). Existential therapy. In A. Deutsch & H. Fishman (Eds.), The ency-
clopedia of mental health (Vol. 2, pp. 583-595). New York, NY: Franklin Watts.
Besora, M. V. (1994). Las psicoterapias existenciales: Desarollo historico y modal-
idades conceptuales. In J. A. C. Teixeira (Ed.), Fenomenologia e psicologia
(pp. 11-23). Lisbon, Portugal: ISPA.
Burston, D. (2003). Existentialism, humanism and psychotherapy. Existential
Analysis, 14, 309.
Cooper, M. (2003). Existential therapies. London, England: Sage.
Cooper, M. (2012). The existential counselling primer: A concise, accessible and
comprehensive introduction. Ross-on-Wye, England: PCCS.
Cooper, M., Vos, J., & Craig, M. (2011). Protocol for EXIST review. Glasgow,
Scotland: University of Stratchlyde.

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com by guest on July 2, 2016

24 Journal of Humanistic Psychology 

Correia, E. A., Cooper, M., & Berdondini, L. (2014). The worldwide distribution
and characteristics of existential counsellors and psychotherapists. Existential
Analysis, 25, 321-337.
Correia, E. A., Cooper, M., & Berdondini, L. (2015). Existential psychotherapy: An
international survey of the key authors and texts influencing practice. Journal of
Contemporary Psychotherapy, 45, 3-10. doi:10.1007/s10879-014-9275-y
Correia, E. A., Cooper, M., Berdondini, L., & Correia, K. (2016). Characteristic
practices of existential psychotherapy: A worldwide survey of practitioners’ per-
spectives. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Craig, E. (2008). A brief overview of existential depth psychotherapy. Humanistic
Psychologist, 36, 211-226. doi:10.1080/08873260802349958
Craig, M., Vos, J., Cooper, M., & Correia, E. (2016). Existential psychotherapies. In
D. J. Cain, K. Keenan & S. Rubin (Eds.), Humanistic psychotherapies: Handbook
of research and practice (2nd ed., pp. 283-317). Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association.
Deurzen, E. V., & Adams, M. (2011). Skills in existential counselling & psychother-
apy. London, England: Sage.
Dillman, D. A., Smyth, J. D., & Christian, L. M. (2009). Internet, mail, and mixed-
mode surveys: The tailored design method (3rd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Elo, S., & Kyngäs, H. (2008). The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of
Advanced Nursing, 62, 107-115. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x
Groth, M. (2015). ET, phone home. Hermeneutic Circular, 2015, 18-19.
Halling, S., & Nill, J. D. (1995). A brief history of existential-phenomenological psy-
chiatry and psychotherapy. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology, 26, 1-45.
doi:10.1163/156916295x00024
Hoffman, L. (2007). Chapter 6: Existential-integrative psychotherapy and god image.
Journal of Spirituality in Mental Health, 9, 105-137. doi:10.1300/J515v09n03-06
Jacobsen, B. (2007). Invitation to existential psychology: A psychology for the unique
human being and its applications in therapy. Chichester, England: Wiley.
Längle, A. (2003). The method of “personal existential analysis.” European
Psychotherapy, 4, 59-75.
Längle, A. (2012). The viennese school of existential analysis: The search for mean-
ing and affirmation of life. In L. Barnett & G. Madison (Eds.), Existential ther-
apy: Legacy, vibrancy and dialogue (pp. 159-170). London, England: Routledge.
Längle, A. (2013). Lehrbuch zur existenzanalyse: Grundlagen. Wien, Austria:
Facultas.wuv.
Mahrer, A. R. (1996). Existential-humanistic psychotherapy and the religious per-
son. In E. P. Shafranske (Ed.), Religion and the clinical practice of psychology
(pp. 433-460). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Millar, M. M., & Dillman, D. A. (2011). Improving response to web and mixed-mode
surveys. Public Opinion Quarterly, 75, 249-269.
Norcross, J. C. (1987). A rational and empirical analysis of existential psychotherapy.
Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 27, 41-68. doi:10.1177/0022167887271005

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com by guest on July 2, 2016

Correia et al. 25

Owen, I. R. (1994). Introducing an existential-phenomenological approach Part II:

Theory for practice. Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 7, 347-358.
Schneider, K. J., & Krug, O. T. (2010). Existential-humanistic therapy. Washington,
DC: American Psychological Association.
Teixeira, J. A. C. (2006). Introdução à psicoterapia existencial [Introduction to exis-
tential psychotherapy]. Análise Psicológica, 24, 289-309.
Walsh, R. A., & McElwain, B. (2002). Existential psychotherapies. In D. J. Cain
(Ed.), Humanistic psychotherapies: Handbook of research and practice (pp. 253-
278). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Yalom, I. D. (1980). Existential psychotherapy. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Author Biographies
Edgar A. Correia is a PhD student at the Department of Counselling, University of
Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK. He is a chartered clinical psychologist and EAP and WCP-
registered existential psychotherapist and a founding member of the Sociedade
Portuguesa de Psicoterapia Existencial (SPPE).
Mick Cooper is a professor of Counselling Psychology at the University of
Roehampton, London, and a UKCP-registered existential psychotherapist. Mick is
author and editor of a wide range of texts on existential, person-centred and relational
approaches to therapy, including Existential Therapies (2nd ed., Sage 2017),
Existential counselling and psychotherapy: Contributions to a pluralistic practice
(Sage 2015) and Pluralistic Counselling and Psychotherapy (Sage 2011, with John
McLeod).
Lucia Berdondini is a lecturer and program leader of BSc(Hons) in Counselling and
Psychotherapy, at the School of Psychology, University of East London, and a BACP
registered Gestalt psychotherapist. She is particularly interested in psychology of
disasters and has focused her professional activity on developing counselling training
courses in countries in war and postconflict.
Karla Correia is a chartered clinical psychologist interested in psychology of stress
and well-being. Karla has a PhD in educational psychology with research in the field
of social and emotional learning.

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com by guest on July 2, 2016

View publication stats