The important standard beta coefficient (? = 0

The Goal Subscale Epistemology was also a significant predictor of therapist emphasis on the working alliance along the Goal subscale (e.g. client and therapist agreement on how to achieve the goals), F(2, 1093) = 4.92, p < .007 (R 2 = .009). 065) for the rationalist epistemology t(1093) = 2.16, p < .031, was in the positive direction. 075) for the constructivist epistemology t(1093) = 2.47, p < .014, was also in the positive direction along the Goal subscale. This was again inconsistent with the proposed hypothesis that the rationalist epistemology would have stronger leanings towards the Goal subscale in the therapist emphasis on working alliance compared to therapists with a constructivist epistemology.

The Bond Subscale Lastly, epistemology was also a significant predictor of the therapist emphasis on the working alliance along the Bond subscale (the development of a personal bond between the client and therapist), F(2, 1089) = , p < .001 (R 2 = .035). The standardized beta coefficient for the rationalist epistemology (? = – 0.034) was in the negative direction, but was not significant, t(1089) = –1.15, p < .249. For the constructivist epistemology, the standardized beta coefficient (? = 0.179) was significant t(1089) = 5.99, p < .0001, and in the positive direction along the Bond subscale. This supported the hypothesis that the rationalist epistemology is less inclined towards therapist emphasis on working alliance on the Bond subscale than the constructivist epistemology.

Practitioners that have an effective constructivist epistemology had a tendency to lay more increased exposure of the non-public bond about healing matchmaking versus therapists which have a rationalist epistemology

The present day analysis showed that therapist epistemology was a life threatening predictor of at least particular areas of the functional alliance. The best in search of was a student in relation to the introduction of a personal bond involving the buyer and you can counselor (Thread subscale). Which supports the idea in the books one constructivist therapists lay an elevated focus on strengthening a quality therapeutic matchmaking characterized by, “desired, information, believe, and you will caring.

Hypothesis step 3-your choice of Particular Therapeutic Interventions

The next and you may finally analysis was created to address new prediction you to definitely epistemology might be a beneficial predictor of therapist entry to specific procedures procedure. Much more particularly, that the rationalist epistemology will declaration playing with process associated with the intellectual behavioural medication (age.g. recommendations providing) more than constructivist epistemologies, and practitioners which have constructivist epistemologies often statement having fun with techniques associated with the constructivist therapy (age.g. mental handling) more practitioners that have rationalist epistemologies). A parallel linear regression research is actually held to determine when your predictor changeable (specialist epistemology) commonly dictate counselor critiques of one’s standards details (treatment procedure).

Epistemology was a significant predictor of cognitive behavioral therapy techniques F(2, 993) = , p < .001 (R 2 = .185). The standardized beta coefficient for the rationalist epistemology (? = 0.430) was significant, t(993) = , p < .001 and in the positive direction. The standardized beta coefficient for the constructivist epistemology (? = 0.057) was significant and in the positive direction t(993) = 1.98, p < .05. This supported the hypothesis that the rationalist epistemology would have stronger leanings of therapist use of cognitive behavioral techniques when conducting therapy than constructivist epistemologies.

Finally, epistemology was a significant predictor spotted hookup of constructivist therapy techniques F(2, 1012) = , p < .001 (R 2 = .138). The standardized beta coefficient for the rationalist epistemology (? = – 0.297) was significant t(1012) = –, p < .0001 and in the negative direction. The standardized beta coefficient for the constructivist epistemology (? = 0.195) was significant t(1012) = 6.63, p < .0001, and in the positive direction. This supported the hypothesis that the constructivist epistemology would place a stronger emphasis on therapist use of constructivist techniques when conducting therapy than rationalist epistemologies.

Laisser un commentaire

Votre adresse e-mail ne sera pas publiée.