The important standard beta coefficient (? = 0

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 sitios web de ligar 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.

Therapists that have an effective constructivist epistemology had a tendency to lay alot more focus on the private bond in the therapeutic relationships compared to therapists that have a rationalist epistemology

The present day research revealed that counselor epistemology try a life threatening predictor with a minimum of some aspects of the working alliance. The best selecting was in regards to the development of a great personal bond involving the visitors and you will specialist (Thread subscale). Which helps the notion from the literary works you to definitely constructivist practitioners lay an elevated emphasis on building a quality therapeutic dating characterized by, “welcome, expertise, trust, and compassionate.

Theory 3-your selection of Specific Healing Interventions

The next and you will finally research is designed to address brand new anticipate you to epistemology was a great predictor off therapist entry to particular treatment procedure. Even more specifically, your rationalist epistemology tend to report using procedure in the intellectual behavioural procedures (elizabeth.grams. pointers giving) over constructivist epistemologies, and you may practitioners that have constructivist epistemologies usually declaration playing with processes of the constructivist treatment (e.grams. mental operating) more therapists with rationalist epistemologies). A multiple linear regression study is actually conducted to decide whether your predictor adjustable (specialist epistemology) often dictate therapist evaluations of one’s criterion parameters (medication processes).

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 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.

Categoría:
Comentarios (0)

Deja una respuesta

Tu dirección de correo electrónico no será publicada. Los campos obligatorios están marcados con *