Two of the most popular psychotherapeutic approaches to treat depression are cognitive-behavioural therapy and psychodynamic psychotherapy, yet little consensus has been reached concerning which therapy is most beneficial for the treatment of depression. A review of the literature revealed that, while cognitive-behavioural therapy and psychodynamic psychotherapy are the most effective psychotherapeutic modalities for the treatment of depression, evidence suggests that neither of these modalities is superior to the other. Furthermore, multiple issues plague the studies investigating these treatments. Efficacy and effectiveness are often confounded, while rates of remission and response are often far less than might be expected from such highly regarded and widely used treatments. Severity of depression appears to moderate treatment outcomes, yet many studies overlook this, while the impact that the aetiology of a patient’s depression has on treatment outcomes is largely ignored in the literature. Additionally, a majority of studies have focused on therapies of short duration, which often have poor follow-up results. Finally, mechanisms of change in the treatment of depression have been ignored to a large extent, but there is some evidence that non-specific therapeutic factors may be more important than specific therapeutic techniques in producing positive treatment outcomes. These issues need to be closely examined and resolved if researchers and clinicians are serious about optimising treatments, improving outcomes, and adequately addressing the serious problem of depression.