Convergence in patient and therapist alliance ratings early in treatment with Personality Assessment Inventory clinical scales and subscales

IF 3.2 3区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Bianca H. Cersosimo, Mark J. Hilsenroth, Robert F. Bornstein, Jerold R. Gold, Mark A. Blais
{"title":"Convergence in patient and therapist alliance ratings early in treatment with Personality Assessment Inventory clinical scales and subscales","authors":"Bianca H. Cersosimo,&nbsp;Mark J. Hilsenroth,&nbsp;Robert F. Bornstein,&nbsp;Jerold R. Gold,&nbsp;Mark A. Blais","doi":"10.1002/cpp.2891","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>We examined discrepancies in 81 patient-therapist dyads' alliance ratings early in treatment (3rd or 4th session) in relation to Personality Assessment Inventory clinical scales, subscales and global psychopathology. Results indicated that PAI global psychopathology (mean clinical elevation) and the scales of Aggression [AGG], Somatization [SOM], and Anxiety-Related Disorders [ARD] were significantly, negatively associated with an absolute difference of patient and therapist alliance ratings at Session 3. Higher initial scores on these clinical scales at treatment onset are associated with less difference (i.e., more convergence) in patient/ therapist ratings of alliance at Session 3. Correlations between PAI clinical subscales and absolute differences of patient and therapist alliance ratings at Session 3 also demonstrated statistically significant inverse relationships for several PAI subscales of Aggression- Attitude [AGG-A], Aggression-Physical [AGG-P], Somatic- Health Concerns [SOM-H], Anxiety-Related Disorders-Traumatic Stress [ARD-T], Anxiety-Related Disorders- Obsessive Compulsive [ARD-O], Borderline Features-Affective Instability [BOR-A], Borderline- Self-Harm [BOR-S], Anxiety-Physiological [ANX-P], Depression-Physiological [DEP-P] and Antisocial-Stimulus Seeking [ANT-S]. Again, higher scores on these subscales at treatment onset are associated with less difference (i.e., more convergence) in patient/therapist ratings. We also examined group differences between patients rating alliance higher (Group 1) and therapists rating alliance higher (Group 2) and found that Group 1 had significantly lower scores on Mania-Activity Level [MAN-A]. Clinical implications of results are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":10460,"journal":{"name":"Clinical psychology & psychotherapy","volume":"30 6","pages":"1512-1519"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical psychology & psychotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cpp.2891","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We examined discrepancies in 81 patient-therapist dyads' alliance ratings early in treatment (3rd or 4th session) in relation to Personality Assessment Inventory clinical scales, subscales and global psychopathology. Results indicated that PAI global psychopathology (mean clinical elevation) and the scales of Aggression [AGG], Somatization [SOM], and Anxiety-Related Disorders [ARD] were significantly, negatively associated with an absolute difference of patient and therapist alliance ratings at Session 3. Higher initial scores on these clinical scales at treatment onset are associated with less difference (i.e., more convergence) in patient/ therapist ratings of alliance at Session 3. Correlations between PAI clinical subscales and absolute differences of patient and therapist alliance ratings at Session 3 also demonstrated statistically significant inverse relationships for several PAI subscales of Aggression- Attitude [AGG-A], Aggression-Physical [AGG-P], Somatic- Health Concerns [SOM-H], Anxiety-Related Disorders-Traumatic Stress [ARD-T], Anxiety-Related Disorders- Obsessive Compulsive [ARD-O], Borderline Features-Affective Instability [BOR-A], Borderline- Self-Harm [BOR-S], Anxiety-Physiological [ANX-P], Depression-Physiological [DEP-P] and Antisocial-Stimulus Seeking [ANT-S]. Again, higher scores on these subscales at treatment onset are associated with less difference (i.e., more convergence) in patient/therapist ratings. We also examined group differences between patients rating alliance higher (Group 1) and therapists rating alliance higher (Group 2) and found that Group 1 had significantly lower scores on Mania-Activity Level [MAN-A]. Clinical implications of results are discussed.

人格评估量表临床量表和分量表在治疗早期对患者和治疗师联盟的评分趋同。
我们研究了 81 个患者-治疗师二人组在治疗早期(第 3 或第 4 个疗程)的联盟评级差异与人格评估量表临床量表、子量表和整体精神病理学的关系。结果表明,PAI 整体精神病理学(平均临床升高)和攻击[AGG]、躯体化[SOM]和焦虑相关障碍[ARD]量表与患者和治疗师在第 3 个疗程的联盟评分绝对值差异呈显著负相关。在治疗开始时,这些临床量表的初始分数越高,在疗程 3 时患者和治疗师对联盟的评分差异越小(即越趋同)。PAI 临床分量表与患者和治疗师在疗程 3 的联盟评分绝对差异之间的相关性也表明,在统计学上,攻击-态度 [AGG-A]、攻击-身体 [AGG-P]、躯体-健康关注 [SOM-H] 等几个 PAI 分量表之间存在显著的反向关系、焦虑相关障碍-创伤性压力[ARD-T]、焦虑相关障碍-强迫症[ARD-O]、边缘型特征-情感不稳定[BOR-A]、边缘型-自残[BOR-S]、焦虑-生理[ANX-P]、抑郁-生理[DEP-P]和反社会-刺激寻求[ANT-S]。同样,治疗开始时这些分量表的分数越高,患者/治疗师的评分差异越小(即越趋同)。我们还研究了对联盟评分较高的患者(第 1 组)和对联盟评分较高的治疗师(第 2 组)之间的组别差异,发现第 1 组在躁狂-活动水平[MAN-A]上的得分明显较低。本文讨论了这些结果的临床意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Clinical psychology & psychotherapy
Clinical psychology & psychotherapy PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
5.60%
发文量
106
期刊介绍: Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy aims to keep clinical psychologists and psychotherapists up to date with new developments in their fields. The Journal will provide an integrative impetus both between theory and practice and between different orientations within clinical psychology and psychotherapy. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy will be a forum in which practitioners can present their wealth of expertise and innovations in order to make these available to a wider audience. Equally, the Journal will contain reports from researchers who want to address a larger clinical audience with clinically relevant issues and clinically valid research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信