目的:本研究调查了治疗技术与会议影响之间的关系,通过检查在大学培训诊所中观察到的发现的可复制性(Boswell等人。,2010)在另一个以实践为导向的环境中:私人实践。
方法:N=8名治疗师完成了对N=38名客户的技术使用情况的会话级别评估。同一客户样本完成了会话结果的会话级别评估。使用多水平模型检查技术-结果关联。
结果:如Boswell等。,共同因素与积极的会话影响相关。对于接受较高平均共同因素技术的客户(相对于他们自己的治疗师的案件量),在使用较高行为更改技术的会话中,会话影响最差(相对于客户自身的平均值)。此外,具有最低平均共同因素技术(相对于其治疗师的案例量)的客户报告,在涉及更高程度的会话级别行为改变技术(相对于他们自己的平均水平)的会话中,会话影响更好。
结论:与Boswell等人一致。,治疗师应该注意他们在客户之间和客户内部使用常规技术的一致性,这可以通过收集他们自己的面向实践的数据来帮助。
Objective: This study investigated the relationship between therapeutic techniques and session impact, by examining the replicability of findings observed in a university-based training clinic (Boswell et al., 2010) in another practice-oriented setting: private practice.
Method: N = 8 therapists completed session-level assessments of their technique use for N = 38 clients. The same client sample completed session-level assessments of session outcome. Technique-outcome associations were examined with multilevel models.
Results: As in Boswell et al., common factors were associated with positive session impact. For clients who received higher average common factor techniques (relative to their own therapist\'s caseload), session impact was the poorest in sessions with higher behavioral change techniques use (relative to the client\'s own average). Moreover, clients with the lowest average common factor techniques (relative to their therapist\'s caseload) reported better session impact in sessions that involved a higher degree of session-level behavioral change techniques (relative to their own average).
Conclusion: In line with Boswell et al., therapists should be mindful of the consistency of their routine technique use between- and within-clients, and this can be aided through collection of their own practice-oriented data.