PSYCHOTHERAPY ENGAGERS VERSUS NON-ENGAGERS

More documents

Recommendations

Info

numbers of approval-reassurance did significantly differ across thirds (9% in the first third, 16% in the second third, 25% in the last third; see Table 2 in Chapter 2). Tryon (2003) found that approval-reassurance was used 7% of the time with non-engagers and 2% of the time with engagers, but no differences were reported across thirds of sessions (these percentages were estimated based on the graph presented in Tryon, 2003). Research Question 2: Do proportions of therapist closed questions differ across time (1 st , 2 nd , and 3 rd thirds of intake sessions) and condition (engager versus non-engager)? Hill (1978) found that use of closed questions decreased significantly between first two thirds and the last third of intake sessions (15% for 1 st third, 14% for 2 nd third, and 9% for last third; p < .01; see Table 1). Tryon (2003) found that closed questions were used on average, 53 times with non-engagers and on average, 89.6 times with engagers, a very large effect (d = 2.86). The timing of closed questions was found to differ between engagers and non-engagers in Tryon (2003): closed questions increased at first then decreased for non-engagers (11, 26, then 16 for raw numbers of occurrences in the 1 st , 2 nd , and last thirds, respectively), and decreased for engagers (40, 30, then 20 in the 1 st , 2 nd , and last thirds, respectively), with p < .02. Research Question 3: Do proportions of therapist open questions about thoughts differ across time (1 st , 2 nd , and 3 rd thirds of intake sessions) and condition (engager versus non- engager)? Currently there are no studies on whether the amount of open questions about thoughts differs across time or condition. Tryon (2003) did provide data about proportions of open questions (all subtypes) across condition – with non-engagers, open questions were used about 6% of the time in comparison with other helping skills used in 67
the intake session, and about 4% with engagers. However, Tryon (2003) did not specifically test whether the conditions (engagers vs. non-engagers) differed on open questions with any statistical methods. Research Question 4: Do proportions of therapist restatements differ across time (1 st , 2 nd , and 3 rd thirds of intake sessions) and condition (engager versus non-engager)? Hill (1978) found that the use of restatements decreased significantly between first two thirds and the last third of intake sessions (8% for 1 st third, 9% for 2 nd third, and 4% for last third; p < .001; see Table 1). Lonborg et al. (1991) did not find significant differences across thirds (9% in the first third, 16% in the second third, 25% in the last third; see Table 2). Tryon (2003) found no significant differences between engagers versus non- engagers for therapist use of restatements (restatements were used about about 6% of the time for both engagement and non-engagement groups). No studies have examined whether the timing of restatements across thirds of intake sessions differed between engagers and non-engagers. Research Question 5: Do proportions of therapist reflections of feeling differ across time (1 st , 2 nd , and 3 rd thirds of intake sessions) and condition (engager versus non-engager)? Hill (1978) and Lonborg et al. (1991) found that the use of reflections did not significantly differ across thirds (see Table 1 and Table 2). No studies have examined reflections across condition (engagers vs. non-engagers), or across the interaction of time and condition for intake sessions. 68
Page 1 and 2:
ABSTRACT Title of Document: PSYCHOT
Page 3 and 4:
PSYCHOTHERAPY ENGAGERS VERSUS NON-E
Page 5 and 6:
Table of Contents List of Tables ..
Page 7 and 8:
Last Third of the Intake: Helping S
Page 9 and 10:
List of Figures Figure 1: Approval-
Page 11 and 12:
therapists (Hill & Lent, 2006), tha
Page 13 and 14:
third of the intake) and types of t
Page 15 and 16:
“completed treatment” - from a
Page 17 and 18:
ange on the OQ-45.2 when beginning
Page 19 and 20:
Wierzbicki and Pekarik (1993) condu
Page 21 and 22:
Enabling factors or barriers refer
Page 23 and 24:
MI evaluation were statistically si
Page 25 and 26: later dropout (Barrett et al., 2008
Page 27 and 28: male) at a university counseling ce
Page 29 and 30: = 12.3, p < .001, and lower rates o
Page 31 and 32: F(1, 261) = 40.64, p < .001. Limita
Page 33 and 34: clinic in a medium-sized Midwestern
Page 35 and 36: Summary. In summary, there are seve
Page 37 and 38: quality of the technique (e.g., app
Page 39 and 40: therapist behaviors which may be be
Page 41 and 42: of the three judges. Based on an ex
Page 43 and 44: theoretical orientation. Furthermor
Page 45 and 46: occur after closed questions, and I
Page 47 and 48: Elliott’s (1985) system used in t
Page 49 and 50: 8 women who were interviewed to det
Page 51 and 52: lasted 20 minutes for each type, tr
Page 53 and 54: corresponded to similar categories
Page 55 and 56: does not provide restatements, refl
Page 57 and 58: presenting concerns, psychosocial h
Page 59 and 60: counselors was reported. Minimal fa
Page 61 and 62: (1991); and Tryon (2003). At the en
Page 63 and 64: counselor’s emphasis from gatheri
Page 65 and 66: composed of volunteer undergraduate
Page 67 and 68: Table 3 Tryon (2003) Mean Number an
Page 69 and 70: therapy service at the university (
Page 71 and 72: treatment outcome (which means the
Page 73 and 74: Chapter 3: Statement of the Problem
Page 75: engagement, and f) a definition of
Page 79 and 80: Research Question 9: Do proportions
Page 81 and 82: Chapter 4: Method The present study
Page 83 and 84: Indian and Portuguese; aged 20-28,
Page 85 and 86: or abandoned by romantic partners.
Page 87 and 88: Intake sessions. When clients arriv
Page 89 and 90: unitizer had a unit in a meaningful
Page 91 and 92: Table 4 Proportions of Helping Skil
Page 93 and 94: Table 6 Proportions of Helping Skil
Page 95 and 96: to the last third of the session, a
Page 97 and 98: second to last third, F(1, 3858) =
Page 99 and 100: Estimated Likelihood (%) 12 10 8 6
Page 101 and 102: significant, F(1, 3856) = 3.95, p =
Page 103 and 104: Research Question 7: Do proportions
Page 107 and 108: Research Question 10: Do proportion
Page 113 and 114: Client Avoidant Attachment Scale Av
Page 115 and 116: Client Outcome Expectations How con
Page 117 and 118: minimal encouragers since the 2009
Page 119 and 120: In contrast, information about the
Page 121 and 122: duration. This null finding diverge
Page 123 and 124: Limitations Although the present st
Page 125 and 126: for need for therapy and “How con
Page 127 and 128:
Appendix A: Preliminary Tests of Th
Page 129 and 130:
Barrett, M., Chua, W., Crits-Christ
Page 131 and 132:
Dodd, J. (1970). A retrospective an
Page 133 and 134:
Hampton-Robb, S., Qualls, R. C., &
Page 135 and 136:
Hill, C. E. (2009). Helping skills:
Page 137 and 138:
Johansson, H., & Eklund, M. (2005).
Page 139 and 140:
Ligiero, D. P., & Gelso, C. J. (200
Page 141 and 142:
Pekarik, G. (1983). Follow-up adjus
Page 143 and 144:
Stiles, W. B. (1978). Verbal respon
Page 145:
Willer, J. (2009). The beginning ps
show all

PSYCHOTHERAPY ENGAGERS VERSUS NON-ENGAGERS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?