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.
Therapists which have an excellent constructivist epistemology tended to set far more emphasis on the personal thread on healing dating compared to practitioners that have an excellent rationalist epistemology
The modern study showed that counselor epistemology try a critical predictor with a minimum of certain aspects of the working alliance. The best trying to find was at regards to the development of a good individual thread between the consumer and you will specialist (Bond subscale). It supports the notion on the literary works one constructivist therapists set a heightened emphasis on strengthening a quality therapeutic relationship described as, “anticipate, facts, faith, and you can compassionate.
Theory step three-your selection of Particular Therapeutic Treatments
The next and you may last analysis was created to target the fresh new prediction that epistemology might be a predictor off counselor usage of en sus 40 sitios de citas para solteros particular therapy procedure. More specifically, that rationalist epistemology tend to report using process associated with the intellectual behavioral cures (e.grams. suggestions offering) more than constructivist epistemologies, and you can practitioners with constructivist epistemologies have a tendency to declaration having fun with techniques associated with constructivist therapy (elizabeth.grams. psychological processing) more practitioners that have rationalist epistemologies). A simultaneous linear regression data try held to choose in the event your predictor variable (specialist epistemology) tend to dictate specialist feedback of the standards details (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.
No responses yet