Joanna M Drinane, Rochelle C Cassells, Scott D Miller, JiSoo Park, David Brown
{"title":"实施(或不实施)反馈治疗的治疗师的态度。","authors":"Joanna M Drinane, Rochelle C Cassells, Scott D Miller, JiSoo Park, David Brown","doi":"10.1037/pst0000587","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Studies of psychotherapy efficacy have highlighted the importance of feedback-informed treatment (FIT), which involves the routine collection of client process and outcome data to inform intervention formulation and clinical decision making. Despite the relative ease with which FIT measures can be integrated into therapeutic practices, many providers do not use these information-gathering tools. The present study analyzed survey responses from therapists whose use of FIT was systemically incentivized and structurally supported. Within this sample, two groups of providers emerged: one (<i>n</i> = 30) that remained engaged in the use of FIT and another (<i>n</i> = 19) that discontinued its use despite its implementation being facilitated. There were some significant differences between the groups. Clinicians who persisted with FIT perceived it as more valid and reported more openness to information from an outside source, whereas clinicians who disengaged from FIT endorsed more antagonistic views about measurement. In addition, clinicians who discontinued FIT reported having a greater belief in the predictive validity of their own judgments without the use of FIT data than did current FIT users. There were statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of their reliance on intuition, but not on their feedback propensities. These findings contribute to the growing literature regarding the effect of attitudes on the use of measurement in therapy when structural barriers to implementation are reduced. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":20910,"journal":{"name":"Psychotherapy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Attitudes among therapists who do (or do not) implement feedback-informed treatment.\",\"authors\":\"Joanna M Drinane, Rochelle C Cassells, Scott D Miller, JiSoo Park, David Brown\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/pst0000587\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Studies of psychotherapy efficacy have highlighted the importance of feedback-informed treatment (FIT), which involves the routine collection of client process and outcome data to inform intervention formulation and clinical decision making. Despite the relative ease with which FIT measures can be integrated into therapeutic practices, many providers do not use these information-gathering tools. The present study analyzed survey responses from therapists whose use of FIT was systemically incentivized and structurally supported. Within this sample, two groups of providers emerged: one (<i>n</i> = 30) that remained engaged in the use of FIT and another (<i>n</i> = 19) that discontinued its use despite its implementation being facilitated. There were some significant differences between the groups. Clinicians who persisted with FIT perceived it as more valid and reported more openness to information from an outside source, whereas clinicians who disengaged from FIT endorsed more antagonistic views about measurement. In addition, clinicians who discontinued FIT reported having a greater belief in the predictive validity of their own judgments without the use of FIT data than did current FIT users. There were statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of their reliance on intuition, but not on their feedback propensities. These findings contribute to the growing literature regarding the effect of attitudes on the use of measurement in therapy when structural barriers to implementation are reduced. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20910,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychotherapy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychotherapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/pst0000587\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"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":"Psychotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/pst0000587","RegionNum":2,"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
心理治疗疗效的研究强调了反馈知情治疗(FIT)的重要性,它包括常规收集客户过程和结果数据,以告知干预制定和临床决策。尽管FIT措施可以相对容易地整合到治疗实践中,但许多提供者并不使用这些信息收集工具。本研究分析了在系统激励和结构支持下使用FIT的治疗师的调查反应。在这个样本中,出现了两组提供者:一组(n = 30)继续使用FIT,另一组(n = 19)停止使用FIT,尽管它的实施得到了促进。两组之间存在一些显著差异。坚持FIT的临床医生认为它更有效,并报告对外部来源的信息更开放,而脱离FIT的临床医生对测量持更敌对的观点。此外,停止FIT的临床医生报告说,在没有使用FIT数据的情况下,他们对自己判断的预测有效性比目前使用FIT的人更有信心。在对直觉的依赖上,两组人有统计学上的显著差异,但在反馈倾向上却没有。这些发现有助于越来越多的文献关于态度对治疗中测量使用的影响,当实施的结构性障碍减少。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA,版权所有)。
Attitudes among therapists who do (or do not) implement feedback-informed treatment.
Studies of psychotherapy efficacy have highlighted the importance of feedback-informed treatment (FIT), which involves the routine collection of client process and outcome data to inform intervention formulation and clinical decision making. Despite the relative ease with which FIT measures can be integrated into therapeutic practices, many providers do not use these information-gathering tools. The present study analyzed survey responses from therapists whose use of FIT was systemically incentivized and structurally supported. Within this sample, two groups of providers emerged: one (n = 30) that remained engaged in the use of FIT and another (n = 19) that discontinued its use despite its implementation being facilitated. There were some significant differences between the groups. Clinicians who persisted with FIT perceived it as more valid and reported more openness to information from an outside source, whereas clinicians who disengaged from FIT endorsed more antagonistic views about measurement. In addition, clinicians who discontinued FIT reported having a greater belief in the predictive validity of their own judgments without the use of FIT data than did current FIT users. There were statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of their reliance on intuition, but not on their feedback propensities. These findings contribute to the growing literature regarding the effect of attitudes on the use of measurement in therapy when structural barriers to implementation are reduced. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).
期刊介绍:
Psychotherapy Theory, Research, Practice, Training publishes a wide variety of articles relevant to the field of psychotherapy. The journal strives to foster interactions among individuals involved with training, practice theory, and research since all areas are essential to psychotherapy. This journal is an invaluable resource for practicing clinical and counseling psychologists, social workers, and mental health professionals.