LAUSR

Abstract Ambivalence can be understood as a cyclical movement between two opposing positions of the self: one expressed in a novelty—an innovative moment (IM)—and another one conveyed by a return to the maladaptive pattern. If not properly addressed and resolved during therapy, ambivalence can prevent change and lead to psychotherapeutic failure. Two processes of ambivalence resolution have been suggested: (1) the dominance of the innovative position and consequent inhibition of the problematic position and (2) the negotiation between both positions. Objectives: To empirically study both processes of ambivalence resolution in a successful case of emotion-focused therapy. Method: Sessions were independently coded with three coding systems—the IMs, the return to the problem and the ambivalence resolution. Results: Ambivalence tended to be resolved from the initial to the final sessions. Although resolutions through dominance tended to decrease and resolutions through negotiation seemingly increased along treatment, dominance was, nonetheless, the most prominent process of resolution along the whole treatment. Conclusions: Although it has been suggested that integrating opposing parts of the self is a necessary process for psychotherapeutic success, a less integrative process of ambivalence resolution may also be an important resource along the process.