PSYCHOTHERAPY ENGAGERS VERSUS NON-ENGAGERS

More documents

Recommendations

Info

investigated in Tryon (2003), which found that information increased as engagement sessions progressed, but initially decreased then increased for non-engagement sessions (see Table 3). Additional Analyses As we conducted the data analyses, a number of additional questions arose about why there were differences between engagers and non-engagers in terms of helping skills. Fortunately, we had collected more data at the research clinic where the study was conducted. Hence, I present additional analyses of differences between engagers and non- engagers in terms of: client attachment, intake session duration, client pre-therapy self- rated need for therapy, and client pre-therapy outcome expectations. 71
Chapter 4: Method The present study examined therapist helping skills across thirds of intake sessions (1 st , 2 nd , and 3 rd thirds) and across engagement condition (engager vs. non- engager). The design of the present study is a quantitative descriptive field design. Power Analyses Power analyses for 2-tailed t-tests indicated that for a large effect size, d = 0.8, at an alpha level of .05, 52 participants (26 engagers, 26 non-engagers) would be needed for 80% power. With the same expected effect size, d = 0.8, and same power level of 80%, but changing the alpha level to .10, 40 clients (20 engagers, 20 non-engagers) would be needed. With the same effect size of .8 and power of 80%, but an alpha of .20, 30 clients would be needed (15 engagers, 15 non-engagers). Effect sizes from Tryon (2003) indicated very large effects for closed questions, d = 2.86, and information, d = 3.29. Using the effect size d = 2.86, and alpha = .10, 6 clients (3 engagers, 3 non-engagers) would be needed to have 80% power. Using the effect size d = 3.29, and alpha = .10, 6 clients (3 engagers, 3 non-engagers) would be needed to have 80% power. The present study, with 8 dropouts and 8 continuers, has 84.5% power to detect effects of d = 1.4 at an alpha level of .10 when such effects indeed exist. Thus, the present sample size provides sufficient power for detecting very large effects (d = 1.4) at alpha levels of .10. Participants and Setting Setting. The present study utilized data collected in the Maryland Psychotherapy Clinic and Research Lab (MPCRL), a mental health clinic providing individual psychodynamic/interpersonal psychotherapy to adults from the local community. One of the main purposes of the clinic was to collect data for psychotherapy research; thus, all 72
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 and 76: engagement, and f) a definition of
Page 77 and 78: the intake session, and about 4% wi
Page 79: Research Question 9: Do proportions
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?