Journal of Psychology and Christianity
2009, Vol. 28, No. 1, 71-77
RESEARCH INTO PRACTICE
Motivational Interviewing: Applications to
Christian Therapy and Church Ministry
John E. Martin and Eunhyang Priscilla Sihn
Graduate School of Psychology
Fuller Theological Seminary
Helping people change may be considered the
primary goal not only of Christian psychology
practice, but also of Christian ministries as well.
Motivational interviewing (MI) (Miller & Rollnick,
1991, 2002) is an increasingly empirically sup-
ported approach to motivating and helping peo-
ple change (Hettema, Steele, & Miller, 2005), for
the treatment of psychological disorders
(Arkowitz, Westra, Miller, & Rollnick, 2008), and
health risk prevention and intervention (Rollnick,
Miller & Butler, 2008). Because of MI’s usefulness
in facilitating behavior change across a variety of
problem and population areas, and due to its
incorporation of what appear to be biblically-
sound spiritual concepts and approaches, it may
be particularly suitable for application to Chris-
tian therapy and church ministry as a whole.
Spiritual integration: From BT to CBT to MI
Approximately 25 years ago, in collaboration
with W.R. Miller, I (jm) put together and chaired
a symposium at the national convention of the
Association for Advancement of Behavior Thera-
py (AABT; now: Association for Behavioral and
Cognitive Therapies, ABCT) on integrating behav-
ioral and spiritual approaches to change (Martin,
1984). This groundbreaking (for behavior thera-
pists, that is) symposium was followed by an
edited book based on its individual papers and
discussion (Miller & Martin, 1988). While behav-
ioral and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT)
approaches to helping people change have been
promoted for Christian therapists and pastors for
some time (Miller & Jackson, 1996), they have
also been critiqued from a Christian perspective
(Jones & Buttman, 1991). Conversely, Tan (Tan &
The authors wish to express their appreciation to Siang-
Yang Tan, Ph.D. and Scott Walters, Ph.D. for their read-
ing of a previous version of the manuscript and their
helpful editorial comments and suggestions. Please
address correspondence to: John E. Martin, Ph.D., Pro-
fessor of Psychology, Graduate School of Psychology,
Fuller Theological Seminary, 180 North Oakland Ave,
Pasadena, CA 91101. (jmartin@fuller.edu).
71
Copyright 2009 Christian Association for Psychological Studies
ISSN 0733-4273
Johnson, 2005; Tan, 2007) has argued persuasively
for the use and integration of CBT within Christian
contexts and practice, as well as for the develop-
ment and promotion within the church of the spe-
cial servant heart and effective helping spirit (Tan,
2006)—a spirit that could be seen as foundational
to the philosophy and practice of MI.
Finally, the so-called “3rd Wave” of CBT (e.g.,
Hayes, 2004; Linehan, 1993) has, in fact, incorpo-
rated profound spiritual concepts as well as thera-
peutic methods within CBT—a combination that
would seem to fit well into the goals and orienta-
tion of Christian therapy and ministries. However,
MI—as a separate and distinct style from both tra-
ditional (2nd wave) and 3rd Wave CBT—may
hold even greater promise for Christian therapy
and church ministry. Other conceptualizations of
integration of psychology, therapy methods and
Christian faith and spirituality have been dis-
cussed elsewhere (e.g., McMinn & Campbell,
2007; Stevenson, Eck, & Hill, 2007) and will not
be addressed in this article. The present article
represents one of the first, if not the first, to focus
on the integration of MI with Christian therapy,
Christian spirituality and, by extension, Christian
church ministry.
The ‘Spirit’ in Motivational Interviewing
Motivational interviewing has been defined, as
well as described at least in part in spiritual terms
—although falling short of what might be consid-
ered Christian-based spirituality. Miller & Rollnick
(2002) state that the spirit of MI can be considered
as resting on three factors, including collabora-
tion, evocation, and autonomy. In MI the coun-
selor and the client collaborate with each other in
a spirit of love and equality, in which a partner-
like relationship is established. The counselor
does exploration rather than exhortation, support-
ing the client rather than persuading or arguing
with the client. In the sense of evocation, it is
believed that resources and motivation of change
reside within the client. By drawing on a client’s
own perceptions, goals, and values, normal
ambivalence about changing or not is addressed,
while intrinsic motivation for change is tapped
and enhanced. Motivation is not imparted or
installed but elicited and evoked from within the
person and his or her mind and spirit. Out of the
spirit of autonomy the client is encouraged to
72 RESEARCH INTO PRACTICE
take responsibility for making choices and
changes. Thus, change arises within the person
rather than from extrinsic motivators. The coun-
selor affirms the right and capacity of the client
for self-direction and facilitates informed choices.
The Spirit of MI in Christian Ministry
While MI has a strong relationship to spirituality
in general, it would appear to reflect at least in
some respects a more specific association with
certain Christian spiritual concepts. For example,
Miller (2000) has noted the critical role of the
Christian concept of agape love in the change
process, as related to the active MI component of
expressed empathy (Miller & Rollnick, 2002). Sim-
ilarly, Yahne and Miller (1999) have discussed the
biblically consistent concept of “hope” in relation
to motivation and change.
Miller (2000) has reviewed the effects of moti-
vational interviewing and compared them with
behavioral self-control training and Christian spiri-
tuality. He noted that even one brief session of
motivational interviewing could bring about sig-
nificantly positive outcomes. He concluded that it
was a deeper form of empathy, or agape, of the
therapist which triggered the change in clients.
This form of ‘motivational agape love’ is well
illustrated in the apostle Paul’s classic love letter
to the Corinthians in 1 Cor 13.
Finally, Miller and C’de Baca (2001) have also
shown the parallel between sudden, profound life
change in individuals and what has been
described as spiritual and religious motivational
epiphanies and processes in their lives. Yet, MI
has not been specifically addressed or empirically
tested as a Christian approach to therapy, person-
al change or in application to Christian ministries
beyond Miller and Jackson’s Practical Psychology
for Pastors (1996).
Research on Motivational Interviewing and
Christianity/Ministry
But what does the literature say? To determine
if there are any studies or writings on MI and
Christian therapy and church ministries, studies
on MI were searched through the PsycINFO
database. A total of 760 articles on MI were
found. Yet, when the search combined “motiva-
tional interviewing” with key words such as Chris-
tianity, ministry, and spirituality, only 4 citations
could be found.
In the most recent study, Miller, Forcehimes,
O’Leary, and LaNoue (2008) evaluated the addi-
tive efficacy of spiritual guidance for addiction
treatment. A specific form of manualized spiritual
counseling was designed and integrated with MI.
It was discovered that there were relatively small
changes in spirituality and that there was a corre-
lation between the number of spiritual guidance
sessions and a differential gain in percent days
abstinent from opiates. Nevertheless, in both stud-
ies, negative overall results question the efficacy
of attempting to manualize and accelerate spiritual
processes and enlist important changes in addic-
tive behavior.
The Christian church setting has also been used
in which MI was employed as at least part of the
intervention. In a series of studies in African-Amer-
ican church settings, Resnicow et al. (2002, 2005)
employed MI to promote healthy nutrition and
physical activity, although it was not directly about
MI and Christianity per se. They reported the clear
additive effect of the MI in modifying dietary
habits, while the effect of MI on physical activity
did not seem so clear (Resnicow et al., 2005).
Two other articles are relevant in addressing
the spirit and approach of MI and Christianity.
Walters and Delaney (2001) point out that thera-
pist factors suggestive of motivational interview-
ing characteristics are very powerful in bringing
about client change. For example, ‘accurate
empathy’ may be redefined in spiritual terms as
possibly agape (Miller, 2000). When exhibited by
therapists, this agape-type empathy can make a
significant difference in client progress, and prob-
lem behavior outcomes, especially in terms of
spiritual development. Even the core values in
their life changed after such deeply spiritual, pos-
itive experiences with the therapist (Walters &
Delaney, 2001).
Finally, Yahne and Miller (1999) have pointed
out the importance of evoking another key spiritu-
al experience, hope, from clients in the course of
psychotherapy. According to them, “Evoking hope
has to do with helping clients discover that there
is more to them than they currently realize”
(Yahne & Miller, 1999, p. 226). Here meet the spir-
it of MI (evocation) and the biblical virtue (hope)
together. This task is not about installing hope but
about “evoking it, calling it from the client’s own
rich resources” (Yahne & Miller, 1999, p. 229).
Interestingly, no studies or articles were found
discussing or directly relating MI to Christianity,
Christian ministries or even pastoral counseling.
We hope in this article, therefore, to address this
potentially important and useful application to
Christian life and purposes of one of the more
empirically supported, effective methods of brief
intervention.

Motivational Interviewing
MI is a brief counseling approach to motivat-
ing and helping people change. It has been
defined as a person-centered, directive
approach to enhancing one’s internal motivation
through addressing, processing and resolving
ambivalence about whether, how and when to
change (Miller & Rollnick, 2002). Its primary
principles for helping others be motivated and
committed to changing consist of four core com-
ponents: (1) expressing empathy for the individ-
ual (through active listening and accurate
reflections); (2) developing discrepancy for the
status quo (not changing); (3) rolling with resis-
tance to change (not arguing for change or pres-
suring the person in any way); and (4)
supporting/ affirming self-efficacy, or the sense
that the individual could indeed change if/when
he or she decided to.
The communication style and process of MI rest
on the foundations of Rogerian client-centered
therapy, while incorporating directive motivation-
al communication strategies. As a part of that
basic process, the MI practitioner is taught to
keep his or her “oars” rowing gently, and
throughout the process and methods of MI, in the
waters of change, so to speak. These common
OARS include: (a) asking mainly Open-ended
questions (“tell me about …” “what else?”) to give
wide latitude and respect for what the client has
to say and think; (b) giving personal Affirmations
or “blessings” that express valuing and worth of
the individual, and understanding and accepting;
and (c) gently guiding the person through the dif-
ferential and strategic use of regular and accurate
empathic Reflections, and (d) reflective Sum-
maries. A type of motivational empowerment is
created when the person hears back what he or
she is saying about him or herself and/or a prob-
lem area of their life—listening to one’s own
‘story’ as told by another using his or her words
in a strategic fashion.
In general, up to three-quarters of the motiva-
tional counselor’s time may be devoted to build-
ing motivation for change. This is termed Phase I.
Next, Phase II consists of strengthening commit-
ment for change and maintenance of change, fol-
lowing the decision to change. Bridging the
critical gap between the two phases of effective
motivation for change is the transitional phase.
The Big Book of Alcoholics Anonymous calls this
a “turning point.” In the Christian world, this has
been described as coming to repentance—turning
about and going in the opposite direction.
RESEARCH INTO PRACTICE 73
In MI, counselors are specially trained to dis-
cern when the individual is ready for commitment
for change, at a decision point in his or her life.
Readiness for transition to Phase II is observed
when the counselor/interviewer sees that the
signs of resistance to change (e.g. arguing, with-
drawing, disagreeing, avoiding change talk) are
no longer present, or greatly reduced, and at the
same time that signs of readiness for change are
more apparent (e.g. asking questions about
change, spontaneous talk about changing, non-
verbal resolve/quietness, etc.). At this point—
which may even be in the first session with the
individual—a directed summary is conducted by
the counselor of the interaction, in the client’s or
person’s words, and stressing reasons for change.
Building motivation for change of Phase I, and
the consolidating motivational summary, is fol-
lowed immediately by the key question. This criti-
cal question nudges the person gently in the
direction of making a decision for and possible
commitment to change. Some possible alternative
key questions include: “So what now? Given what
we have talked about, what do you think you need
to do now? Where does this leave you? What’s the
next step for you? What if anything do you think
you’d like to do now?” and so on.
Once the individual indicates interest or willing-
ness in doing something or changing, then a
problem-solving strategy and change plan can be
invoked, negotiated and activated as appropriate
and desired.
Importantly, the motivational interviewer does
not address or talk about change, or need for
change, until signs of readiness for change are
clearly observed, and resistance against change
are no longer apparent. Otherwise, individuals
will likely increase their resistance to any and all
efforts to talk about the need for change and how
change needs to happen—e.g. giving them scrip-
ture of what is wrong with them and how they
are commanded to change. In contrast, MI has
been described as a ‘way of being with’ a person,
using ‘gentle guidance’ but never pressure, shame
or threats (Miller & Rollnick, 2002)—the latter
which can often backfire into more entrenched
resistance against change.
MI Methods and Exercises
A brief listing of some of the specific methods
and exercises of MI includes: 1) Developing Dis-
crepancy and Eliciting Change Talk: 2) Rolling
with Resistance; and 3) Supporting Self-Efficacy.
The following section provides a basic, albeit
74 RESEARCH INTO PRACTICE
incomplete, discussion and some illustration of
how the MI style might be employed:
1. Developing discrepancy/eliciting change
talk. We know that people consider changing
when the reasons for change outweigh the rea-
sons for staying the same. This may occur particu-
larly when a person begins talking about why and
how he might and should change. The counselor
or pastor might select several approaches that
could help nudge or gently guide the individual in
a direction away from being “stuck” in an ambiva-
lent state, including the decisional balance. A
briefer way to tip the balance toward change,
heighten discrepancy and possibly elicit change
talk, is the good things/not so good things about
not changing question (emphasizing the latter, to
tip the balance toward change).
Another very useful strategy, with special appli-
cation in Christian therapy, is the values clarifica-
tion exercise. Here the client or individual is
asked to come up with and order his or her top 5
or 10 personal core values (e.g., family, church,
health, loving God, job success, etc.), or to select
from a values card-sort (see htttp://casaa.unm.edu
for a free download of the values card-sort). The
individual is then asked to assess whether a cer-
tain problem or change possibility area, such as
drinking or marital conflict, either enhances or
potentially harms that life value. Discussion of
these results may then help to build further dis-
crepancy for remaining with the status quo, as
well as for eliciting talk about change. Particularly
useful in the Christian or spiritual context, is to
add a second core value list of God’s values for
the person or couple, for further and perhaps
more potent motivational contrast and compari-
son (S.Walters, personal communication, 2000).
We also know that many individuals first imag-
ine or envision what change would look and feel
like before they might experiment with action and
change. One way to prompt this ‘motivational
envisioning’ is to ask the hypothetical questions
of: “What if you were to decide to make this
change. What would your life look like in say, a
year or 5 years? What would be the best case sce-
nario? What would be the worst case scenario if
you decided not to change?
2. Rolling with Resistance. In every commu-
nication opportunity there is resistance. Some-
times referred to as “denial,” in which the person
rejects or argues with efforts to change her mind
about a thing, we now believe that this is merely
normal resistance to pressure to change thinking
and/or behavior. There are several motivationally
consistent approaches to dealing indirectly with
resistance, including emphasizing personal free-
dom and choice (“only you can decide whether to
do anything about this”) and affirming the indi-
vidual’s personal autonomy and freedom to
choose. Other methods of dealing with resistance
include reframing the issue in less problematic
ways. Shifting focus, or changing the subject, is an
additional way of meeting resistance. When the
interaction has reached a resistant “dead-end,”
one of the best ways to get back on track without
offending the individual with an abrupt change of
subject is to summarize what he or she is saying.
This is followed immediately by an open-ended
question, shifting focus to a more relevant topic
(e.g. “so you feel this and that … about … Now,
would it be OK if you told me more about...?”).
Two intriguing approaches to meeting resis-
tance, which would not be considered MI per se,
may otherwise be useful when meeting higher
levels of resistance. These somewhat paradoxical
exercises would seem almost counterintuitive, and
do not come without risk. First, is to argue
against change in some way (e.g., “maybe this is
something that you will never do, or is not really
worth doing”) to invite, in a way, the person to
resist the push away and come back in the oppo-
site direction, toward the counselor (e.g., “I don’t
know. Maybe it could be worth doing some
time…”). It’s like giving the person a sort of a
gentle nudge away from the positive change
direction to tempt him to push back in your direc-
tion, the direction of desirable change.
Second, the reverse debate exercise is a motiva-
tional challenge procedure that can elicit change
talk while addressing higher levels of resistance.
In this exercise, the counselor or pastor also
‘takes the negative’ or argues for not changing.
But in this case the individual is asked to partici-
pate in a debate or ‘argument’—that is, arguing
for change, while the counselor or pastor (who
has already discussed the individual’s resistances
and reasons for not changing the problem behav-
ior or lifestyle choices) argues against change.
This role play can be used in a one-to-one coun-
seling session, or in a group setting, where it can
be an especially lively and even fun exercise. The
counselor makes a strong case and encourages
the client to make an equally strong case for the
opposite. Either with an individual or group (see
Walters, Ogle & Martin, 2002, for a discussion of
MI in group settings), the motivational interviewer
hopes to evoke positive change talk from the per-
spective and words of those to be influenced for

change. The point is: It’s hard to argue against
yourself, and even more difficult to have resis-
tance against what you say.
3. Supporting/Enhancing Self-Efficacy. Help-
ing the person to believe that change is possible, if
not that he or she can change upon deciding to, is
a critical phase in the process of MI. This sense of
self-efficacy, or ability to do something successful-
ly, is key to whether any attempt will be made.
There are several MI approaches that can enhance
a person’s self-efficacy about change, but perhaps
one of the best brief strategies is that of impor-
tance/confidence ratings.
The importance/confidence rating may be an
especially useful exercise when time is more lim-
ited, to bolster personal self-efficacy as well as to
produce change talk and personal change
empowerment. Individuals are asked to rate the
importance of and then their confidence in chang-
ing on a 1 to 10 scale. This is followed by asking
the individual for positive reasons for why a par-
ticular area of change is important and then why
he or she could be confident in making the
change after deciding (including reflections and
summaries of the responses). Finally, to deter-
mine what help might be needed, any rating less
than 7 would be followed by the question: “What
would it take to be a 7 or an 8 (avoiding the ‘per-
fect 10’)/what would have to happen to have it
reach a 7 or 8?
Transition from Building Motivation
to Action Commitment
The motivational interviewer can transition to
Phase II with a summary and key question once
he or she sees that the individual shows signs of
readiness for change, little or no signs of resis-
tance to change, and/or spontaneous change and
commitment talk.
Change Plan. At this point a change plan may
be informally discussed, or more formally nego-
tiated and developed. In this step, reasons for
changing are reviewed and discussed once
again, the specific change desired is defined,
along with a detailing of the barriers to avoid
and resources to employ in the planned change
process. Also included should be when the plan
will start and what is the time-line for evaluating
results. Thus, the change plan can either be an
unwritten and gradual process engaged by the
individual with gentle guidance from the MI
practitioner, or formally written, like a contract,
with copies going to the individual and the inter-
viewer/counselor.
RESEARCH INTO PRACTICE 75
MI and Jesus
While Jesus used many contrasting methods of
communicating with and motivating people in the
gospels, one example suggestive of motivational
interviewing is his conversation with the Samari-
tan woman (John 4: 1-26). It is not hard to see
that Jesus showed deep, loving acceptance and
empathy for this woman throughout their conver-
sation. His attitude was respectful and non-judg-
mental even when he was talking about her
previous husbands. This experience of acceptance
(agape love) empowered her to engage more
with him and to see herself. Then, Jesus devel-
oped discrepancy by noting the high values in
her life—ancestor Jacob, worshipping the one
true God, a well of continuous life-giving water,
and eternal life—and then changed the topic to
her husband(s)—her shameful reality and prob-
lem. She was gently influenced to see for herself
the discrepancy between her life predicament and
her core values and goals. Yet, she was ambiva-
lent about change, and probably believed she
could not change even if she wanted to. That
seemed to be why she changed the topic into the
place of worship. Jesus did not argue with her.
Instead, he rolled with her resistance or defen-
siveness. He maintained a respectful attitude
toward her; he invited her to see the new per-
spective of life, not imposing or forcing his higher
perspective. He supported her self-efficacy and
enhanced her confidence in her own capability to
cope with her problems and to make a commit-
ment to change. He eventually encouraged her to
turn to him as the Messiah or Savior.
Do No Harm: Non-Motivational
Communication Habits, Snares and Traps
Finally, a critical part of training in MI is learn-
ing what not to do, how not to motivate for
change. Miller and Rollnick (2002) and MI train-
ing overall address a number of potentially prob-
lematic communication patterns and habits – that
may have been modeled and taught in a variety
of educational and training institutions, including
the church. What MI is not is also important to
keep in mind. Regrettably, and somewhat prob-
lematically, MI has been falsely conceptualized,
attributed to or practiced, as merely a form of
the transtheoretical stages of change model, CBT,
or even “a way of tricking people into doing
what you want them to do!” (Miller & Rollnick,
in press).
Many, if not most, MI trainers such as myself
(jm) spend considerable time addressing a
76 RESEARCH INTO PRACTICE
number of these potentially ineffective and
often counterproductive communication styles.
Before ‘training in’ those more empirically sup-
ported motivational styles and strategies consis-
tent with MI, it is important to attempt to bring
to awareness, and begin to ‘train out’ as many
communication barriers and roadblocks, traps
and snares as possible. These non- or counter-
motivational communication patterns could be
apparent in counselors and ministry workers
who may be unaware of them and therefore
unconsciously and habitually practice. These
barriers to motivation can include arguing pre-
maturely or too forcefully for change, excessive
questioning of or warning the client, or talking
down to the individual from a position as an
expert or authority. All of these motivational
‘errors’ can evoke an opposite, reciprocal reac-
tance effect in the person who feels pushed
and is quite naturally resisting the experience of
being pressured into change. Ironically, these
understandable, and well-meaning efforts to
help a person change may actually push the
individual away from the very direction desired
or which might be best for him or her. The
reader is referred to Miller and Rollnick (2002)
for a more complete discussion of those basic
communication styles opposing as well as asso-
ciated with motivation.
MI in Christian Ministry:
Some Concluding Thoughts
In all forms and practices of Christian min-
istry, effective communication and motivation
are crucial. As such, might MI play a potentially
important role in the training and effective prac-
tice of pastoral counseling, Christian ministry
and discipleship, as well as in training others in
adhering to the various spiritual disciplines (e.g.,
Foster, 1978)? Further, could Bible study and
even evangelism training approaches, as well as
preaching/teaching and prayer methods, benefit
from MI training and practice? This remains to
be seen, and perhaps evaluated systematically in
the future.
Nevertheless, the MI approach and method
might be of real value in enhancing the effective-
ness of Christian therapy as well as specific
church ministries—limited only by the level of
training and expertise of the practitioner. Indeed,
doing more good, or at least less harm, depends
on more than one’s heartfelt, positive motive, or
sheer determination to help.
MI may be an extremely helpful approach to
helping people to come out of their spiritual and
lifestyle ambivalence, to make a decision and
commitment to change direction, perhaps to seek
God and Truth. Competent and effective employ-
ment of one of the most empirically supported
forms of brief communication styles may not only
be desirable but perhaps warranted considering
the ultimate, profound eternal significance of a
decision for Christ.
Another area of Christian ministry functioning
that may potentially benefit from MI approaches
and training is the mercy and helps ministries.
The MI communication style stimulates the prac-
titioner to engage others in highly empathic and
loving fashion, while also knowing how to deal
with normal human resistances in our therapeu-
tic and organizational environments. MI can pro-
vide critically-timed, strategic guidance of the
most needy individuals into and through the
positive personal change process (e.g. not just
giving them a fish; but motivating them to learn
how to fish).
Finally, while it may be seen as an encroach-
ment of sorts into the ‘protected’ religious activi-
ties of Christian teaching, preaching, exhortation
and even mutual prayer, MI may hold special
promise for the effective promotion of those func-
tions and goals as well. For example, I (jm) have
found myself using motivational reflections and
summaries, and even the key question, when I
pray for another while they are listening along-
side. I try to use not only reflections but also affir-
mations and summaries, and may even include a
recognition of the individual’s readiness or rela-
tive resistance to change, adding when possible a
key question.
It is believed that motivational interviewing
strategies discussed and illustrated in this article
could be effectively employed by a well-trained
Christian counselor, pastor or minister across a
variety of ministry responsibilities, settings and
problem areas. But training in MI to competence
levels takes time and hard work. We refer the
reader to the excellent text by Miller and Rollnick
(2002) for a thorough presentation of the style,
approach and methods of motivational interview-
ing, to the recent book on MI in healthcare by
Rollnick, Miller and Butler (2008), and the very
informative and helpful resource website for MI
(http://motivationalinterview.org), which provides
information on the MI training video/DVD series,
as well as the schedule of training workshops
available around the world.

References
Arkowitz, H., Westra, H.A., Miller, W.R., & Rollnick, S.
(Eds.). (2008). Motivational interviewing in the treatment
of psychological disorders. New York: Guilford Press.
Foster, R. (1978). Celebration of discipline. New York:
Harper & Row.
Hayes, S. C. (2004). Acceptance and commitment
therapy and new behavior therapies: Mindfulness,
acceptance, and relationship. In S.C. Hayes, M.V. Fol-
lette, & M.M. Linehan (Eds.), Mindfulness and accep-
tance: Expanding the cognitive-behavioral tradition
(pp. 1-29). New York: Guilford Press.
Hettema, J., Steele, J., & Miller, W. R. (2005). Motiva-
tional interviewing. Annual Review of Clinical Psycholo-
gy, 1, 91-111.
Jones, S., & Butman, R. (1991). Modern psychothera-
pies: A comprehensive Christian critique. Downers
Grove, IL: Inter Varsity Press.
Linehan, M. M. (1993). Skills training manual for
treating borderline personality disorder. New York: Guil-
ford Press.
Martin, J. E. (1984). Integrating spiritual and behavioral
approaches to change. Symposium presented before the
national convention of the Association for Advancement
of Behavior Therapy, April, Philadelphia, PA.
McMinn, M. R., & Campbell, C. D. (2007). Integrative
psychotherapy: Toward a comprehensive Christian
approach. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity.
Miller, W. R. (2000). Rediscovering fire: Small inter-
ventions, large effects. Psychology of Addictive Behav-
iors, 14 (1), 6-18.
Miller, W. R., & Martin, J. E. (Eds.) (1988). Behavior
therapy and religion: Integrating spiritual and behav-
ioral approaches to change. Woodland Hills, CA: Sage
Press.
Miller, W. R., & Rollnick, S. (1991). Motivational inter-
viewing: Preparing people to change addictive behavior.
New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Miller, W. R., & Rollnick, S. (2002). Motivational inter-
viewing: Preparing people for change (2nd ed.). New
York: Guilford Press.
Miller, W. R., & Jackson, K. (1996). Practical psycholo-
gy for pastors. New York: Wiley.
Miller, W. R., Forcehimes, A., O’Leary, M.J., & LaNoue,
M.D. (2008). Spiritual direction in addiction treatment:
Two clinical trials. Journal of Substance Abuse Treat-
ment, 35, 434–442.
Miller, W. R., & C’de Baca, J. (2001). Quantum
change: When epiphanies and sudden insights transform
ordinary lives. New York: Guilford Press.
Miller, W. R., & Rollnick, S. (in press). Ten things MI is
not. Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy.
RESEARCH INTO PRACTICE 77
Resnicow, K., Jackson, A., Braithwaite, R., Dilorio,
C., Blisset, D., Rahotep, S., & Periasamy, S. (2002).
Healthy body/healthy spirit: A church-based nutrition
and physical activity intervention. Health Education
Research, 17, 562-573.
Resnicow, K., Jackson, A., Blissett, D., Wang, T.,
McCarty F., Rahotep, S., & Periasamy, S. (2005). Results
of the Healthy Body Healthy Spirit Trial. Health Psy-
chology, 24, 339-348.
Rollnick, S., Miller, W. R., & Butler, C. (2008). Motiva-
tional interviewing in health care. New York: Guilford
Press.
Stevenson, D. H., Eck, B. E., & Hill, P. C. (2007).
Psychology & Christianity integration: Seminal
works that shaped the movement. Batavia, IL.: CAPS
International.
Tan, S.Y. (2006). Full service: Moving from self-serve
Christianity to total servanthood. Grand Rapids, MI:
Baker.
Tan, S. Y. (2007). Use of prayer and scripture in cog-
nitive-behavioral therapy. Journal of Psychology and
Christianity, 26, 101-111.
Tan, S. Y., & Johnson, W. B. (2005). Spiritually orient-
ed cognitive-behavioral therapy. In L. Sperry, & E.P.
Shafranske (Eds.), Spiritually oriented psychotherapy
(pp. 77-103). Washington, D.C.: American Psychological
Association.
Walters, S. T. (2000). Personal communication. San
Diego, CA.
Walters, S. T., & Delaney, H. D. (2001). Addiction
and health: A (not so) new heuristic for change. Jour-
nal of Psychology and Christianity, 20, 240-249.
Walters, S. T., Ogle, R., & Martin, J. E. (2002). The
perils and possibilities of a group-based M.I. In W. R.
Miller & S. Rollnick (Eds.). Motivational interviewing:
Preparing people for change (2nd ed.) (pp. 377-390).
New York: Guilford Press.
Yahne, C. E., & Miller, W. R. (1999). Evoking hope.
In W. R. Miller (Ed.), Integrating spirituality into treat-
ment: Resources for practitioners (pp.217-233). Wash-
ington DC: American Psychological Association.
Authors
John E. Martin, Ph.D. is Professor of Psychology at the
Graduate School of Psychology, Fuller Theological Semi-
nary in Pasadena, California, USA.
Eunhyang Priscilla Sihn, M.A., M.Div, is a graduate
student in the Ph.D. program in Clinical Psychology at
the Graduate School of Psychology, Fuller Theological
Seminary in Pasadena, California, USA.