Inner Child Work: What It Means, Evidence, and What It Does Not Diagnose
Author: Ukrainian Psychological Hub · Published: September 22, 2026 · Editorial Policy
Inner child work is an umbrella term for reflective or therapeutic practices that use the idea of a younger self to explore emotions, beliefs, needs, memories, and coping patterns connected with childhood. For some people, the metaphor creates a clear way to approach shame, self-criticism, fear, grief, play, unmet needs, or old relationship expectations. It can also be overinterpreted. The “inner child” is not an official diagnosis, a literal child living inside an adult, or a scientifically established anatomical part of the brain.
The most accurate scientific position is narrower than many popular accounts. Inner child work is not one standardized psychotherapy protocol with a single evidence base. Research instead evaluates specific techniques and therapies that may overlap with what people call inner child work, including imagery rescripting, chairwork, schema therapy, and self-compassion-based interventions. Evidence for those methods cannot automatically be transferred to every exercise, workbook, social-media practice, or therapy marketed as “inner child healing.”
This article owns the definition-and-evidence question: what inner child work means, what parts of it have empirical support, what the phrase cannot diagnose or prove, and how to approach it without turning a metaphor into a clinical fact. Broader questions about healing from childhood trauma, detailed trauma treatment, memory, neglect, attachment, and diagnosis are handled in their own canonical articles.
What Is Inner Child Work?
In ordinary use, “inner child” refers to a representation of one’s younger self or of childhood-linked emotional experiences that still matter in the present. Inner child work uses that representation deliberately. A person might imagine speaking to a younger version of themselves, write from a child and adult perspective, notice a present reaction that resembles an older pattern, identify a need that was difficult to express in childhood, or practice a more compassionate response to memories and emotions.
The metaphor can organize experience without claiming that the mind literally contains a separate child. Different therapy traditions use different language for related processes: modes, parts, ego states, schemas, self-states, imagery, compassionate self-relating, or developmental narratives. These concepts are not interchangeable, and their scientific status differs.
The term has appeared in professional psychotherapy literature. For example, a 2018 article proposed an “inner child” formulation within a cognitive-behavioral framework and described a twin-mode protocol. That paper shows that the language can be used in clinical theory; it does not by itself establish the efficacy of “inner child work” as a general treatment. The distinction between a proposed therapeutic model and controlled outcome evidence matters.
A practical definition is therefore: inner child work is metaphor-based self-reflection or therapeutic work that uses representations of childhood-linked experience to understand and respond differently to present emotions, beliefs, needs, or behavior. The value of the exercise depends on what is being done, why it is being done, and whether the specific technique is appropriate for the person and problem.
Is the Inner Child a Clinical Diagnosis?
No. “Inner child,” “wounded inner child,” and “inner child work” are not diagnoses in DSM-5-TR or ICD-11. The American Psychiatric Association describes DSM-5-TR as a diagnostic classification with criteria intended for trained clinicians, while the World Health Organization’s ICD-11 clinical descriptions define recognized mental, behavioral, and neurodevelopmental disorders. DSM-5-TR diagnostic classification and ICD-11 clinical diagnostic guidance do not turn metaphorical therapy language into a disorder.
That distinction has several consequences. Feeling connected to a younger version of yourself does not establish that you have a mental disorder. Feeling disconnected from childhood does not establish one either. A therapist’s use of “parts” or “child mode” language does not mean a person has dissociative identity disorder. A painful childhood memory does not by itself establish PTSD or complex PTSD. A pattern of self-criticism, people-pleasing, fear of rejection, perfectionism, or relationship difficulty is not a diagnostic test for a “wounded inner child.”
Clinical diagnosis asks a different set of questions: which symptoms are present, how long they have lasted, how much impairment or distress they cause, what alternative explanations must be considered, and whether the full criteria for a recognized condition are met.
Does Inner Child Work Mean You Had Childhood Trauma?
No. Childhood adversity, potentially traumatic events, trauma responses, emotional neglect, attachment patterns, and psychiatric disorders overlap in some people but are distinct concepts.
A person may use inner child exercises because they experienced abuse, neglect, bereavement, family instability, bullying, chronic illness, migration, social exclusion, or other difficult experiences. Another person may use the same exercises to explore ordinary developmental memories, family expectations, self-criticism, creativity, or needs that were not easy to express. The choice to use the metaphor does not determine whether an event qualifies as traumatic or whether a disorder is present.
Likewise, current distress does not reveal its own history. Anxiety, shame, avoidance, emotional reactivity, low self-worth, perfectionism, relationship insecurity, and difficulty setting boundaries can emerge through many pathways. Childhood experiences may be one contributor among several, alongside later relationships, temperament, learning history, current stress, socioeconomic conditions, neurodevelopmental factors, physical health, and other influences.
For a broader explanation of exposure and outcomes, see Childhood Trauma: Types, Effects, Adult Outcomes, and Recovery. For the specific boundary between adversity and adult attachment, see Childhood Trauma and Attachment: What Research Supports and What It Does Not.
What People Usually Do in Inner Child Work
There is no universally accepted protocol. Practices grouped under the term commonly include several different psychological operations.
Imagining or Writing to a Younger Self
A person may picture themselves at a particular age and respond from an adult perspective. The exercise can be used to identify what the child understood at the time, what information or protection was unavailable, what the adult now knows, and what present-day response would be more helpful.
This resembles some forms of imagery work, but resemblance is not equivalence. A structured imagery-rescripting intervention studied in a clinical trial is not the same thing as any visualization labeled “inner child healing.”
Chair Dialogues and Perspective Shifts
Some experiential therapies use two-chair or empty-chair procedures to help a person express conflicting perspectives, emotions, needs, or unfinished interpersonal business. Popular inner child exercises may use a similar dialogue between an adult perspective and a younger-self representation.
Again, the evidence belongs to chairwork as operationalized in studies, not to every dialogue exercise.
Compassionate Self-Responding
Many inner child practices ask a person to respond to vulnerability with less contempt and more care. That overlaps with self-compassion research. The overlap can make the practice psychologically plausible without proving that “inner child work” is the mechanism responsible for change.
Identifying Schemas, Beliefs, and Unmet Needs
A person may notice enduring beliefs such as “I have to be perfect to be accepted,” “my needs are dangerous,” or “other people will leave if I disappoint them.” Schema-focused therapies explicitly work with enduring patterns and, in some versions, with “child modes.” Research on schemas can therefore inform some claims about developmental patterns, while still leaving causal questions open.
Present-Day Behavioral Change
Useful work does not have to remain inside imagery. It may lead to present choices: asking for support, setting a boundary, correcting harsh self-talk, allowing rest or play, testing a belief, changing a relationship pattern, or seeking appropriate treatment. Those actions are observable in the present and do not require a person to prove a hidden childhood narrative.
What Does the Scientific Evidence Actually Show?
The evidence is best understood in layers. The strongest conclusion is not that inner child work has been validated as a single treatment. It is that several specific methods that can resemble or be incorporated into inner child-oriented work have their own research literatures.
Direct Evidence for “Inner Child Work” as a Standalone Treatment: Limited
“Inner child work” does not name one standardized intervention in major treatment guidelines, and the academic literature contains conceptual formulations using the term rather than a large, coherent body of randomized trials of one agreed protocol. This makes broad efficacy claims difficult to evaluate. Two practitioners may both say they use inner child work while doing substantially different things.
A useful evidence rule follows: ask what technique is actually being used, for which problem, in which population, and with what outcome data.
Imagery Rescripting: Promising Evidence for Specific Clinical Problems
Imagery rescripting is a structured technique in which distressing mental imagery or memories are revisited and altered in imagination to change their meaning or emotional impact. It is used within several therapies and can sometimes look similar to a younger-self exercise.
A 2023 systematic review and meta-analysis identified 23 trials involving 805 adults across conditions including PTSD, social anxiety disorder, borderline personality disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, nightmare disorder, and several anxiety presentations. Imagery rescripting showed large pre-to-post changes and advantages over passive controls, while its overall advantage over active controls was small. That pattern supports imagery rescripting as a promising technique while cautioning against attributing all change to the technique itself.
The evidence therefore supports a defined intervention in defined populations. It does not establish that visualizing a younger self is universally effective or that imagery reveals historical truth.
Chairwork: a Growing Evidence Base Across Several Therapeutic Contexts
A 2023 meta-analysis found that chairwork could deepen emotional experiencing and that repeated use across treatment was associated with meaningful intervention effects, while some comparisons with other active methods showed little difference. The results support chairwork as a potentially useful experiential method rather than a uniquely superior one.
A newer systematic review published in 2026 examined 22 randomized controlled trials of experiential therapies including chairwork across depression, childhood-trauma-related difficulties, PTSD, OCD, social anxiety, eating disorders, and other clinical domains. Effects varied substantially across outcomes and therapeutic approaches. The review described chairwork as promising while emphasizing variation in the evidence base.
These findings are relevant when inner child work uses structured chair dialogues. They still do not validate every “talk to your inner child” exercise.
Schema Therapy: Evidence Belongs to Schema Therapy and the Populations Studied
Schema therapy is a defined psychotherapy that works with maladaptive schemas, coping responses, and modes. Some schema-therapy language can overlap with popular ideas of vulnerable child states and corrective caregiving experiences.
A 2023 systematic review and meta-analysis of schema therapy for personality disorders included eight randomized controlled trials and seven single-group trials. Compared with control conditions, schema therapy produced moderate improvements in personality-disorder symptoms and quality of life. This is evidence for schema therapy in the studied clinical populations, not proof that generic inner child work has the same effect.
The developmental theory also needs careful causal language. A 2021 systematic review and meta-analysis found associations between reported childhood adversity and early maladaptive schemas in adulthood, but 32 of the 33 included studies were not longitudinal. The review supports association far more strongly than a simple individual causal rule. A person’s current schema does not prove what happened in childhood, and an adverse childhood experience does not dictate one adult schema.
Self-Compassion: Supportive Evidence for a Related Process
Compassion toward vulnerable parts of oneself is central to many inner child exercises. Self-compassion has its own research base.
A systematic review of 35 studies found a fairly consistent association between higher self-compassion and lower PTSD symptom severity, while evidence that self-compassion interventions directly reduce PTSD symptoms was more tentative and mechanisms remained uncertain. The authors specifically called for more prospective and longitudinal work.
A later systematic review and meta-analysis of 12 studies found a medium pooled reduction in post-traumatic stress symptoms for self-compassion-focused interventions, with evidence of heterogeneity and publication-bias concerns. That result supports self-compassion-oriented interventions as potentially useful while leaving important uncertainty.
The reasonable inference is that compassionate self-responding can be therapeutically useful. It is not evidence that a literal inner child exists or that self-compassion works only by repairing childhood wounds.
Why Inner Child Work Can Feel Powerful Without Proving a Theory
An exercise can be psychologically meaningful even when its metaphor is not a literal scientific entity. Several ordinary mechanisms may contribute.
One is attention. A structured exercise can help a person notice emotions and beliefs that are usually rushed past or criticized. Another is perspective-taking: the adult may apply context, knowledge, and compassion that were unavailable earlier. A third is emotional learning. A person can practice a different response to shame, fear, grief, or need. A fourth is behavioral translation: identifying a need can lead to a current action, such as asking for support, resting, leaving an unsafe situation, or testing an old prediction.
None of these mechanisms requires the claim that an “inner child” is stored in a particular brain region, that trauma is physically trapped in the nervous system, or that a visualization rewrites the past. Neural, endocrine, immune, and autonomic research on adversity concerns probabilistic group-level findings and cannot be used to diagnose an individual through an exercise.
The metaphor is best judged by what it helps a person observe and change in the present, not by whether it can be turned into a biological story.
What “Wounded Inner Child” Signs Can and Cannot Tell You
Online lists often describe a “wounded inner child” through signs such as people-pleasing, perfectionism, fear of abandonment, low self-esteem, anger, conflict avoidance, difficulty trusting, emotional numbness, shame, or intense reactions to criticism.
These experiences can be real and clinically important. They are also nonspecific. None is unique to childhood trauma, neglect, attachment insecurity, PTSD, dissociation, or any single developmental explanation. Similar experiences can appear in anxiety disorders, depressive disorders, OCD, personality pathology, neurodevelopmental conditions, current abusive relationships, chronic stress, grief, and people without a psychiatric disorder.
A checklist of these features is therefore a self-reflection prompt, not a diagnostic instrument. It cannot tell you whether childhood trauma occurred, how “damaged” someone is, whether they have PTSD, or what treatment they need.
If emotional neglect is the specific question, Childhood Emotional Neglect: Signs, Adult Effects, and What Research Shows explains the construct and its measurement limits in more detail.
Inner Child Work and Memory: a Critical Boundary
Inner child work can involve autobiographical memory, and that creates an important scientific and ethical boundary: imagery is not a memory-verification tool.
Human memory is reconstructive. People can forget events, remember them later, remember some details more clearly than others, misremember details, or experience strong emotion without having a complete narrative. None of those facts allows a therapist, app, workbook, or visualization to infer a hidden event from a symptom.
A 2026 systematic review of 42 studies on recovered traumatic memories found widely varying prevalence estimates depending on how recovery was defined, which populations were studied, and whether memories emerged spontaneously or in therapy. The review did not identify a unique cognitive mechanism that makes a recovered memory automatically self-validating. It supports a reconstructive account of autobiographical memory and the need for careful clinical practice.
A 2025 review of therapists’ beliefs about traumatic memory likewise emphasized the risk of false-memory formation when clinicians try to recover unremembered trauma and noted a consensus that deliberate attempts to retrieve presumed hidden trauma should be avoided. Suggestive practices are a specific clinical risk.
The practical implication is clear. If imagery, journaling, a dream, a bodily sensation, or an emotional reaction produces a scene or impression, treat it as an experience occurring now, not as independent proof that an event happened. Work with known memories, uncertainty, present emotions, and current needs without converting ambiguity into certainty.
For a fuller treatment of this topic, see Childhood Trauma and Memory: Why Recall Can Be Clear, Fragmented, or Incomplete.
Inner Child Work, Attachment, and Relationships
Early caregiving and later relationships can be related, but adult attachment is probabilistic rather than a fixed childhood verdict. Inner child language may help someone notice expectations such as “closeness is unsafe,” “I must earn care,” or “conflict means abandonment.” Those expectations can be explored as present beliefs without declaring that they came from one specific event.
Attachment style is also not a diagnosis. Adult attachment research commonly describes dimensions of anxiety and avoidance rather than treating popular categories as hidden childhood injuries. A current adult relationship can reinforce, soften, or change patterns, and different relationships can evoke different responses.
If the main question is whether childhood trauma causes a particular attachment pattern, use the dedicated Childhood Trauma and Attachment article rather than treating inner child language as an attachment test.
Inner Child Work Versus Reparenting
The terms overlap in popular and some therapeutic usage, but they are not identical.
Inner child work is the broader label for engaging with childhood-linked emotions, representations, needs, or beliefs. Reparenting usually refers more specifically to providing, practicing, or symbolically representing forms of care, protection, structure, validation, or limit-setting that were experienced as insufficient earlier. In schema therapy, “limited reparenting” has a specific model-based meaning inside the therapeutic relationship. In self-help culture, reparenting is often used much more broadly.
Neither term means that childhood is biologically rewritten. Neither is an official diagnosis. Reparenting should not be treated as a scientifically established standalone treatment merely because a broader therapy that contains related techniques has evidence.
Because reparenting has its own canonical search intent in this cluster, this article does not turn it into a second full guide. The core boundary is enough here: inner child work is an umbrella metaphor and practice family; reparenting is one related concept that may appear within it.
Is Inner Child Work an Evidence-Based Treatment for PTSD?
“Inner child work” itself is not a treatment label recommended as a standalone PTSD intervention in major evidence-based guidelines.
The 2025 American Psychological Association guideline for adult PTSD is based on a systematic review and recommends or suggests specific psychotherapies according to the evidence. APA’s guideline should be read as guidance for a diagnosed clinical condition, not as a list of wellness exercises. The World Health Organization’s 2023 guidance for adults with PTSD identifies trauma-focused cognitive behavioral therapies, EMDR, and stress-management approaches among recommended psychological interventions, with the recommendation strength and evidence quality stated explicitly. WHO PTSD intervention guidance likewise addresses PTSD, not a generic history of childhood adversity.
An evidence-based therapist may still use imagery, chairwork, compassion, schema language, or developmentally informed formulations when appropriate. The important question is whether those elements are being used within a coherent treatment plan for a defined problem and whether the claims being made match the evidence.
Adults seeking treatment for clinically significant trauma-related symptoms can compare evidence-based approaches in Therapy for Childhood Trauma in Adults: Evidence-Based Approaches and How They Differ. The broader recovery question belongs to Healing From Childhood Trauma.
Can You Do Inner Child Work on Your Own?
Low-intensity reflection can be done independently by many adults, especially when it stays grounded in present-day observation rather than trying to uncover hidden trauma. A useful self-guided exercise can be simple.
Start with a present situation. Describe what happened and what you felt without first deciding what childhood event caused it. Then ask whether the reaction reminds you of an earlier pattern you actually remember. If it does, distinguish memory from interpretation: what do you know happened, what do you infer, and what remains uncertain?
Next, imagine responding to the younger version of yourself from your current adult perspective. You might ask: What did I need at that age? What did I believe then? What do I know now that I did not know then? What can I provide or choose in the present?
End with a current action. That might be setting a boundary, asking for reassurance directly, scheduling rest, testing a fearful prediction, speaking to yourself less harshly, contacting someone supportive, or deciding that the issue deserves professional help.
The exercise is more defensible when it increases present-day clarity and choice. It becomes riskier when it is used to manufacture certainty about unremembered events, diagnose oneself, pressure oneself into emotional flooding, or replace indicated clinical care.
When Is Professional Support a Better Choice?
Professional support becomes more important when reflection reliably produces overwhelming distress, severe dissociation, panic, intrusive trauma memories, major functional impairment, persistent depression, substance-related risk, self-harm, suicidal thinking, or other symptoms that need assessment and treatment.
It is also reasonable to seek therapy when a person simply wants structure, feedback, or help distinguishing several possible explanations for a recurring pattern. The role of a competent clinician is not to tell someone which childhood story they must discover. It is to assess the current problem, consider history without overclaiming causality, explain treatment options, and monitor whether the work is helping.
A trauma history alone does not mean everyone needs trauma therapy. Treatment should be matched to current symptoms, impairment, diagnosis where applicable, goals, preferences, and safety.
How to Evaluate an Inner Child Practitioner, Course, or Program
The term is broad enough that the quality of what is offered varies substantially. A credible practitioner or program should be able to explain what techniques it actually uses and what those techniques are intended to address.
Be cautious when a program claims that common symptoms prove hidden childhood trauma, promises to recover blocked memories, says a specific ACE score reveals how traumatized you are, guarantees nervous-system “rewiring,” or treats every adult problem as an unprocessed childhood wound. These claims go beyond what the evidence can establish.
More grounded practice distinguishes metaphor from diagnosis, known memory from inference, population-level research from individual causation, and a specific evidence-based treatment from a branded umbrella term. It also leaves room for uncertainty and for explanations that are not centered on childhood.
What Inner Child Work Does Not Diagnose or Prove
Inner child work does not diagnose PTSD, complex PTSD, depression, anxiety, dissociative disorders, attachment disorders, personality disorders, OCD, or any other mental disorder.
It does not determine whether someone experienced abuse, emotional neglect, or another specific event. It does not establish that a current relationship pattern was caused by childhood. It does not measure how traumatized a person is. It does not turn emotional intensity into proof of a hidden memory. It does not show that the nervous system is permanently damaged. It does not establish that a person has a separate inner personality.
Those are not technicalities. They protect the difference between a meaningful therapeutic metaphor and an unsupported factual claim.
What Inner Child Work Can Reasonably Be Used For
Used carefully, the approach can provide a language for self-observation. It can help some people slow down a familiar reaction, notice an old belief, acknowledge grief, practice self-compassion, imagine a corrective response, or connect reflection to a current choice.
If it is used inside psychotherapy, its value should be judged by the goals and outcomes of that therapy. If it is used as self-help, its value can be judged by whether it increases flexibility, self-understanding, and useful action without increasing confusion, certainty about unverified events, or avoidance of effective care.
The strongest scientific position is neither to dismiss the metaphor nor to inflate it. The metaphor can be useful. Specific related techniques have varying degrees of evidence. The claims should stay attached to the evidence that actually exists.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is Inner Child Work Scientifically Proven?
Not as one standardized standalone treatment. The research base is stronger for specific related techniques and therapies, such as imagery rescripting, chairwork, schema therapy in particular clinical populations, and self-compassion-focused interventions. Evidence for those approaches supports carefully bounded claims about those methods; it does not validate every practice called inner child work.
Is the Inner Child a Real Part of the Brain?
There is no recognized brain structure called the inner child. The phrase is best understood as a metaphor or model for childhood-linked memories, emotions, beliefs, needs, and self-representations. Brain research on learning, memory, emotion, and stress does not convert the metaphor into a discrete anatomical entity.
How Do I Know if I Have a Wounded Inner Child?
There is no validated diagnostic category called a wounded inner child. Popular “signs” such as shame, perfectionism, people-pleasing, fear of rejection, or difficulty trusting are nonspecific. They can be explored, but they do not identify a childhood cause or diagnosis.
Can Inner Child Work Uncover Repressed Trauma?
It should not be used as a method for proving or deliberately recovering presumed hidden trauma. Autobiographical memory is reconstructive, and suggestive attempts to retrieve unremembered events can create serious errors. A memory or image that emerges during an exercise should not be treated as independently verified evidence.
Can Inner Child Work Help if I Do Not Remember Much of My Childhood?
A person can work with present emotions, known memories, values, needs, and current behavior without filling memory gaps with assumptions. Limited childhood recall has many possible explanations and does not itself prove trauma. The dedicated article on childhood trauma and memory explains those distinctions in more depth.
Is Inner Child Work the Same as Therapy?
No. It can be a self-help practice, a metaphor used within therapy, or a set of exercises embedded in a broader therapeutic approach. A licensed psychotherapy for a diagnosed condition has its own assessment, treatment rationale, training requirements, and evidence base.
Is Inner Child Work the Same as Reparenting?
They overlap, but reparenting is a narrower concept centered on providing or practicing forms of care, protection, validation, structure, or limit-setting associated with unmet developmental needs. Reparenting also has model-specific meanings, especially in schema therapy. Neither term is a diagnosis.
Do I Need Inner Child Work if I Had Childhood Trauma?
No. People with childhood adversity differ widely in symptoms, functioning, preferences, and treatment needs. Some may find the metaphor useful; others may prefer different language or no childhood-focused work at all. When a clinical disorder is present, treatment should be chosen on the evidence for that disorder rather than on the assumption that everyone with childhood trauma needs the same technique.
Can Inner Child Work Replace Evidence-Based PTSD Treatment?
It should not be assumed to do so. If a person has PTSD, major guidelines support specific evidence-based psychotherapies. Inner-child-oriented exercises may sometimes be used as adjunctive techniques, but their presence does not make a treatment equivalent to a guideline-supported PTSD protocol.
Related Articles
References
American Psychiatric Association. (n.d.). About DSM-5-TR. https://www.psychiatry.org/psychiatrists/practice/dsm/about-dsm
American Psychological Association. (2025). Clinical Practice Guideline for the Treatment of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) in Adults. https://www.apa.org/ptsd-guideline
Carey, O. G., Dempsey, M., Minihane, K., & Murphy, G. (2026). When, where, and how often do individuals recover memories of traumatic experiences? A systematic review. Memory, 34(2), 238–259. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2025.2601699
Hestbech, A. M. (2018). Reclaiming the inner child in cognitive-behavioral therapy: The complementary model of the personality. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 71(1), 21–27. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.psychotherapy.20180008
Kroener, J., Hack, L., Mayer, B., & Sosic-Vasic, Z. (2023). Imagery rescripting as a short intervention for symptoms associated with mental images in clinical disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 166, 49–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2023.09.010
Luo, X., Che, X., Lei, Y., & Li, H. (2021). Investigating the influence of self-compassion-focused interventions on posttraumatic stress: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Mindfulness, 12, 2865–2876. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-021-01732-3
Ottingerová, L., Halamová, J., & Szitás, D. (2026). Experiential therapies including Chairwork: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Frontiers in Psychology, 16, 1692630. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1692630
Pascual-Leone, A., & Baher, T. (2023). Chairwork in individual psychotherapy: Meta-analyses of intervention effects. Psychotherapy, 60(3), 370–382. https://doi.org/10.1037/pst0000490
Pilkington, P. D., Bishop, A., & Younan, R. (2021). Adverse childhood experiences and early maladaptive schemas in adulthood: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy, 28(3), 569–584. https://doi.org/10.1002/cpp.2533
Schemmel, J., & Volbert, R. (2025). Therapists’ beliefs about traumatic memory: Possible effects on therapy proceedings and contributions to false memory formation. Current Opinion in Psychology, 66, 102121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102121
Winders, S.-J., Murphy, O., Looney, K., & O’Reilly, G. (2020). Self-compassion, trauma, and posttraumatic stress disorder: A systematic review. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy, 27(3), 300–329. https://doi.org/10.1002/cpp.2429
World Health Organization. (2023). Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD): Psychological interventions – adults. https://www.who.int/teams/mental-health-and-substance-use/treatment-care/mental-health-gap-action-programme/evidence-centre/conditions-related-to-stress/posttraumatic-stress-disorder-%28ptsd%29--psychological-interventions---adults
World Health Organization. (2024). Clinical descriptions and diagnostic requirements for ICD-11 mental, behavioural and neurodevelopmental disorders. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240077263
Zhang, K., Hu, X., Ma, L., Xie, Q., Wang, Z., Fan, C., & Li, X. (2023). The efficacy of schema therapy for personality disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Nordic Journal of Psychiatry, 77(7), 641–650. https://doi.org/10.1080/08039488.2023.2228304