60 минут, которые изменят Ваше мнение о ПСИХОЛОГИИ! Алексей Кройтор про МЕТОДЫ и КУРСЫ психологов

Summary

Host Kristina Medinskaya interviews psychologist and course creator Alexey Kroytor about the rise of psychology content online, how to assess practitioners, and whether brief psychological techniques can help.

The discussion is opinionated. Claims about specific practitioners and the effectiveness of Kroytor’s approach reflect the guest’s views and are not independently verified conclusions.

Main ideas

• Basic techniques may be taught quickly, but competence takes longer. Kroytor says people can learn some psychotechnical methods and conduct initial sessions within two to three months. He compares learning a technique to learning to drive: acquiring the basics is not the same as becoming highly skilled.
• Easy access to training has lowered the barriers to entering the field. He argues that psychology training is inexpensive and that some people start advising others before gaining enough practical experience or addressing their own issues.
• Online popularity is not proof of effectiveness. The speakers note that social-media accounts usually showcase successful cases, while dissatisfied clients may be less visible. They discuss the difference between public-facing psychological content and private clinical work.
• The guest’s view of professional responsibility has limits. Kroytor divides responsibility into four areas: the specialist’s, the client’s, shared responsibility, and matters neither can control. He says practitioners are responsible for their preparation, honesty, methods, and conduct during a session, but not for the client’s life choices afterward or the speed of change. He also argues that no one can predict exactly how many sessions a client will need.
• The speakers implicitly disagree about risk. Kroytor asserts that an hour-long conversation cannot create psychological trauma unless it involves a direct threat to safety or survival. The interview presents this as his position, not as a settled professional consensus.
• A method should be judged by what it does for a particular person. Kroytor argues that an approach need not be universal to be useful. He describes some methods as suitable only for certain clients and emphasizes looking at individual outcomes.
• Education matters, but credentials alone do not establish skill. Kroytor supports ongoing education, supervision, and personal therapy for practitioners. At the same time, he cautions that diplomas and certificates do not prove that someone can work effectively or avoid projecting their beliefs onto clients. He emphasizes reviewing a practitioner’s actual sessions and practical work.
• The guest’s “instant psychology” approach: Kroytor says his course teaches techniques, their appropriate applications, a version of schema-based work, and professional fundamentals. He claims that some basic fears and phobias can be addressed in 20–30 minutes. He explains this through memory reconsolidation: recalling an experience can alter how it is remembered, and revisiting it in a safe state may reduce its emotional charge. These are claims Kroytor makes about his method.
• Training and practice described by Kroytor: His course lasts three months. He says students first study for personal use, while a professional track adds topics such as ethical boundaries, conflict resolution, difficult clients, and supervision. Some graduates may later receive retraining diplomas, but Kroytor stresses that experience and continued supervision are still needed.
• The interview critiques popular practitioners and methods. The speakers discuss Yulia Ivlieva’s online sessions, Veronika Stepanova’s provocative style, Mark Barton’s public commentary, and Inna Tliashinova’s advice. Kroytor sometimes acknowledges that a style or method may resonate with some people while criticizing what he sees as weak reasoning, shaming, or harmful generalizations. He also distinguishes regression—returning to past memories—from suggestion or guided imagery, and discusses Tarot, metaphorical cards, and family constellations as methods whose status and rationale vary.
• Why people may be drawn to certain experts: Kroytor suggests that unresolved emotional patterns can shape which partners and specialists people trust. He argues that a harsh or humiliating style may feel familiar to someone with experiences of rejection or humiliation.
• Advice, boundaries, and maturity: Kroytor says advice alone rarely changes someone’s emotional state; he views psychological work as using techniques that alter a person’s response. He also suggests that phrases such as “you violated my boundaries” can reflect immaturity when used to shame or control someone. The discussion distinguishes this from calmly stating discomfort and setting a limit.
• Science and subjective benefit: Kroytor argues that a person may reasonably value a method that helps them, even if science does not yet provide a complete explanation. The interview does not establish that subjective improvement proves a method is safe or scientifically effective.
• Marketing and education: The guest recommends separating attention-grabbing content from material that explains a method in depth. He says bold claims should be supported with reasoning, while acknowledging that provocative content can attract audiences to psychology.

Speakers and sources featured

Speakers

• Kristina Medinskaya — host and interviewer.
• Alexey Kroytor — guest; psychologist and proponent of “instant psychology,” as described in the interview.

People, organizations, and approaches discussed or referenced

Yulia Ivlieva; Veronika Stepanova; Mark Barton; Inna Tliashinova; Natalya Ashinova; Anatoly Kashpirovsky; Bert Hellinger and family constellations; Jeffrey Young and schema therapy; Pavel Rakov; and the Higher School of Economics (HSE), in connection with a popularity ranking mentioned by the host.

The discussion also references regression, hypnosis and suggestion, Tarot, metaphorical cards, and memory reconsolidation.