PSYCHOTHERAPY ENGAGERS VERSUS NON-ENGAGERS
PSYCHOTHERAPY ENGAGERS VERSUS NON-ENGAGERS
PSYCHOTHERAPY ENGAGERS VERSUS NON-ENGAGERS
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
significant, F(1, 3856) = 3.95, p = .047. Figure 5 depicts the Condition X Time<br />
interaction for the adjusted estimated mean percentages of reflections of feeling.<br />
Estimated Likelihood (%)<br />
3<br />
2.5<br />
2<br />
1.5<br />
1<br />
0.5<br />
0<br />
Reflections of Feeling<br />
1st Third 2nd Third 3rd Third<br />
Thirds of Intake Session<br />
92<br />
Non-engager<br />
Engager<br />
Figure 5. Adjusted estimated mean percentages of reflections of feeling for engagers and non-engagers<br />
across thirds of the intake session. The Condition X Time interaction was significant, F(2, 3856) = 3.17, p<br />
= .042. Engager and non-engager groups did not significantly differ from each other (comparing vertically)<br />
within any of the thirds.<br />
Research Question 6: Do proportions of therapist disclosure-miscellaneous differ across<br />
time (1 st , 2 nd , and 3 rd thirds of intake sessions) and condition (engager versus non-<br />
engager)?<br />
For disclosure-miscellaneous, there was no statistically significant Condition X<br />
Time interaction, F(2, 3856) = 1.64, p = .195, and so we removed the interaction term<br />
from the model and tested the main effects models. Therapist use of disclosure-<br />
miscellaneous did not significantly differ between engagers and non-engagers, F(1, 3861)