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 having a beneficial constructivist epistemology had a tendency to put far more increased exposure of the personal bond on the therapeutic relationship compared to the therapists with a good rationalist epistemology
The current analysis revealed that counselor epistemology try a critical predictor of at least certain aspects of the functional alliance. The strongest trying to find was a student in relation to the development of a private bond involving the client and you can counselor (Bond subscale). So it supports the idea on literature you to constructivist therapists lay a greater focus on building a good therapeutic dating characterized by, “invited, expertise, believe, and caring.
Theory 3-the selection of Certain Healing Treatments
The third and you https://datingranking.net/it/incontri-internazionali/ may latest data is made to target the newest prediction you to definitely epistemology might be an effective predictor out-of counselor access to particular medication process. Alot more particularly, that the rationalist epistemology usually declaration using processes of the cognitive behavioral procedures (e.grams. suggestions offering) more than constructivist epistemologies, and you will practitioners with constructivist epistemologies have a tendency to statement playing with procedure on the constructivist therapy (age.g. psychological control) more practitioners which have rationalist epistemologies). A simultaneous linear regression studies was used to decide if the predictor adjustable (counselor epistemology) will influence counselor critiques of the criterion details (therapy 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.