使用扩展版促进性人际交往技能表现测试确定不同治疗师之间的差异

IF 2.5 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Sabine J. van Thiel, Kim de Jong, Kirsten S. Misset, Margot C. W. Joosen, Jac J. L. van der Klink, Jeroen K. Vermunt, Arno van Dam
{"title":"使用扩展版促进性人际交往技能表现测试确定不同治疗师之间的差异","authors":"Sabine J. van Thiel,&nbsp;Kim de Jong,&nbsp;Kirsten S. Misset,&nbsp;Margot C. W. Joosen,&nbsp;Jac J. L. van der Klink,&nbsp;Jeroen K. Vermunt,&nbsp;Arno van Dam","doi":"10.1002/jclp.23687","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>The therapist-facilitative interpersonal skills (FIS) has shown to predict therapy outcomes, demonstrating that high FIS therapists are more effective than low FIS therapists. There is a need for more insight into the variability in strengths and weaknesses in therapist skills. This study investigates whether a revised and extended FIS-scoring leads to more differentiation in measuring therapists' interpersonal skills. Furthermore, we explorative examine whether subgroups of therapists can be distinguished in terms of differences in their interpersonal responses.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Method</h3>\n \n <p>Using secondary data analysis, 93 therapists were exposed to seven FIS-clips. Responses of therapists using the original and the extended FIS scoring were rated.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Three factors were found on the extended FIS scoring distinguishing supportive, expressive, and persuasive interpersonal responses of therapists. A latent profile analysis enlightened the presence of six subgroups of therapists.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Using the revised and extended FIS-scoring contributes to our understanding of the role of interpersonal skills in the therapeutic setting by unraveling the question what works for whom.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":15395,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Psychology","volume":"80 7","pages":"1698-1710"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jclp.23687","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Determining differences between therapists using an extended version of the facilitative interpersonal skills performance test\",\"authors\":\"Sabine J. van Thiel,&nbsp;Kim de Jong,&nbsp;Kirsten S. Misset,&nbsp;Margot C. W. Joosen,&nbsp;Jac J. L. van der Klink,&nbsp;Jeroen K. Vermunt,&nbsp;Arno van Dam\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jclp.23687\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objectives</h3>\\n \\n <p>The therapist-facilitative interpersonal skills (FIS) has shown to predict therapy outcomes, demonstrating that high FIS therapists are more effective than low FIS therapists. There is a need for more insight into the variability in strengths and weaknesses in therapist skills. This study investigates whether a revised and extended FIS-scoring leads to more differentiation in measuring therapists' interpersonal skills. Furthermore, we explorative examine whether subgroups of therapists can be distinguished in terms of differences in their interpersonal responses.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Method</h3>\\n \\n <p>Using secondary data analysis, 93 therapists were exposed to seven FIS-clips. Responses of therapists using the original and the extended FIS scoring were rated.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Three factors were found on the extended FIS scoring distinguishing supportive, expressive, and persuasive interpersonal responses of therapists. A latent profile analysis enlightened the presence of six subgroups of therapists.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>Using the revised and extended FIS-scoring contributes to our understanding of the role of interpersonal skills in the therapeutic setting by unraveling the question what works for whom.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15395,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical Psychology\",\"volume\":\"80 7\",\"pages\":\"1698-1710\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jclp.23687\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jclp.23687\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jclp.23687","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的治疗师-促进性人际交往技能(FIS)可预测治疗结果,表明高 FIS 治疗师比低 FIS 治疗师更有效。我们需要更深入地了解治疗师技能的强弱差异。本研究调查了经过修订和扩展的 FIS 评分是否能在测量治疗师的人际交往技能方面带来更多差异。此外,我们还探索性地研究了是否可以根据治疗师在人际反应方面的差异来区分治疗师亚群。结果在扩展的 FIS 计分中发现了三个因素,它们区分了治疗师的支持性、表达性和说服性人际反应。结论使用经修订和扩展的 FIS 计分有助于我们了解人际关系技巧在治疗环境中的作用,揭示了什么对谁有效的问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Determining differences between therapists using an extended version of the facilitative interpersonal skills performance test

Determining differences between therapists using an extended version of the facilitative interpersonal skills performance test

Objectives

The therapist-facilitative interpersonal skills (FIS) has shown to predict therapy outcomes, demonstrating that high FIS therapists are more effective than low FIS therapists. There is a need for more insight into the variability in strengths and weaknesses in therapist skills. This study investigates whether a revised and extended FIS-scoring leads to more differentiation in measuring therapists' interpersonal skills. Furthermore, we explorative examine whether subgroups of therapists can be distinguished in terms of differences in their interpersonal responses.

Method

Using secondary data analysis, 93 therapists were exposed to seven FIS-clips. Responses of therapists using the original and the extended FIS scoring were rated.

Results

Three factors were found on the extended FIS scoring distinguishing supportive, expressive, and persuasive interpersonal responses of therapists. A latent profile analysis enlightened the presence of six subgroups of therapists.

Conclusion

Using the revised and extended FIS-scoring contributes to our understanding of the role of interpersonal skills in the therapeutic setting by unraveling the question what works for whom.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical Psychology
Journal of Clinical Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
3.30%
发文量
177
期刊介绍: Founded in 1945, the Journal of Clinical Psychology is a peer-reviewed forum devoted to research, assessment, and practice. Published eight times a year, the Journal includes research studies; articles on contemporary professional issues, single case research; brief reports (including dissertations in brief); notes from the field; and news and notes. In addition to papers on psychopathology, psychodiagnostics, and the psychotherapeutic process, the journal welcomes articles focusing on psychotherapy effectiveness research, psychological assessment and treatment matching, clinical outcomes, clinical health psychology, and behavioral medicine.
×
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