Clients’ Race/Ethnicity as a Moderator of the Relationship Between the Therapeutic Alliance and Treatment Outcome

IF 1 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED
Yue Li, Susan Whiston, Y. Joel Wong, Lynn Gilman
{"title":"Clients’ Race/Ethnicity as a Moderator of the Relationship Between the Therapeutic Alliance and Treatment Outcome","authors":"Yue Li, Susan Whiston, Y. Joel Wong, Lynn Gilman","doi":"10.1007/s10447-024-09546-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Although the therapeutic alliance has been established as among the most potent ingredients that promotes positive treatment outcome, the alliance-outcome relationship for Black, Indigenous, People of Color (BIPOC) clients as compared to White clients remains unexamined. The current study investigated the differences between BIPOC and White clients regarding therapeutic alliance and treatment outcome, as well as clients’ race/ethnicity as a moderator of the alliance-outcome relationship such that it would be weaker for BIPOC clients. Archival data from a training clinic at a large Midwestern university in the USA was used, including 308 White and 132 BIPOC clients. The differences in therapeutic alliance and treatment outcome were analyzed using independent-sample <i>t</i>-tests. Moderation analysis was conducted using hierarchical linear regression. Therapeutic alliance reported by BIPOC clients, especially Asian and Pacific Islander and Black clients, was significantly lower than White clients. There was no significant difference in treatment outcome between BIPOC vs. White clients. Clients’ racial/ethnic status did not moderate the alliance-outcome relationship. The findings indicated that BIPOC clients who persisted in psychotherapy benefited from it as much as White clients. However, BIPOC clients experienced a weaker therapeutic alliance. The results highlighted the importance of building an effective therapeutic alliance with BIPOC clients by providing culturally sensitive and race-informed psychotherapy.</p>","PeriodicalId":46561,"journal":{"name":"INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COUNSELLING","volume":"20 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COUNSELLING","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10447-024-09546-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Although the therapeutic alliance has been established as among the most potent ingredients that promotes positive treatment outcome, the alliance-outcome relationship for Black, Indigenous, People of Color (BIPOC) clients as compared to White clients remains unexamined. The current study investigated the differences between BIPOC and White clients regarding therapeutic alliance and treatment outcome, as well as clients’ race/ethnicity as a moderator of the alliance-outcome relationship such that it would be weaker for BIPOC clients. Archival data from a training clinic at a large Midwestern university in the USA was used, including 308 White and 132 BIPOC clients. The differences in therapeutic alliance and treatment outcome were analyzed using independent-sample t-tests. Moderation analysis was conducted using hierarchical linear regression. Therapeutic alliance reported by BIPOC clients, especially Asian and Pacific Islander and Black clients, was significantly lower than White clients. There was no significant difference in treatment outcome between BIPOC vs. White clients. Clients’ racial/ethnic status did not moderate the alliance-outcome relationship. The findings indicated that BIPOC clients who persisted in psychotherapy benefited from it as much as White clients. However, BIPOC clients experienced a weaker therapeutic alliance. The results highlighted the importance of building an effective therapeutic alliance with BIPOC clients by providing culturally sensitive and race-informed psychotherapy.

客户的种族/族裔是治疗联盟与治疗结果之间关系的调节因素
尽管治疗联盟已被确定为促进积极治疗结果的最有效成分之一,但黑人、土著、有色人种(BIPOC)客户与白人客户之间的联盟-结果关系仍未得到研究。本研究调查了黑人、原住民和有色人种客户与白人客户在治疗联盟和治疗结果方面的差异,以及客户的种族/民族作为联盟-结果关系的调节因素,从而使黑人、原住民和有色人种客户的联盟-结果关系更弱。研究使用了美国中西部一所大型大学培训诊所的档案数据,其中包括 308 名白人和 132 名 BIPOC 客户。使用独立样本 t 检验分析了治疗联盟和治疗结果的差异。使用层次线性回归法进行了调节分析。据报告,BIPOC 客户(尤其是亚太裔和黑人客户)的治疗联盟明显低于白人客户。BIPOC 与白人客户在治疗结果上没有明显差异。求助者的种族/民族状况并不影响联盟与结果之间的关系。研究结果表明,坚持接受心理治疗的 BIPOC 客户与白人客户一样从中受益。然而,BIPOC 客户的治疗联盟较弱。研究结果凸显了通过提供具有文化敏感性和种族信息的心理治疗,与 BIPOC 客户建立有效治疗联盟的重要性。
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
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
6.70%
发文量
38
期刊介绍: The International Journal for the Advancement of Counselling is published under the auspices of the International Association for Counselling. It promotes the exchange of information about counselling activities throughout the world. The Editorial Board is committed to working with diverse authors from varied backgrounds to meet the publication standards for the International Journal for the Advancement of Counselling, including assistance with organization, structure, and style for publication. The journal publishes conceptual, practical, and research contributions that provide an international perspective on the following areas: Theories and models of guidance and counselling; Counsellor education and supervision; State of the art reports on guidance and counselling in specific settings; Social justice and equity (e.g., issues of diversity, advocacy, racial or ethnic identity, religion and culture, gender issues); Special applications; Counselling services in countries with social and economic challenges.
×
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