The meta-analysis of Luborsky et al. (this issue) confirms the significance
of an investigator allegiance effect in psychotherapy research and clarifi
es the magnitude of this effect. In this commentary, I argue that the inves
tigator allegiance is most likely a proxy measure of the expertise of the i
nvestigator's team with the novel therapy and the disproportionately lower
credibility and,integrity of the comparator condition. Hence, larger allegi
ance effects are more likely early in the developmental history of research
with newer therapies, that is, when pseudotherapies or nonspecific compara
tors are commonly used. Studies that offer active comparators that are both
credible and rigorously and professionally' administered are unlikely to s
how an allegiance effect. Use of "blinded," independent evaluations of outc
ome provides another safeguard. The investigator allegiance effect does not
need to be an anathema to psychotherapy researchers.